1999 PLP 3150 (PTD)
MOTI TRUST Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
| Citation | 1999 PLP 3150 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | 236 I T R 37 |
| Bench Members | B. N. Kirpal and S. P. Kurdukar, JJ |
| Parties | MOTI TRUST Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX |
| Primary Law | Income-tax |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 3150 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Income-tax as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 3150 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the 236 I T R 37 bench comprising: B. N. Kirpal and S. P. Kurdukar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 3150 (PTD) (MOTI TRUST Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Discretionary trust
Amount actually received by beneficiaries
Can be assessed in the hands of beneficiaries
No principle that only trustee can be assessed
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 161 &
164. Held, that even if the trust in question had to be regarded as a discretionary trust inasmuch as the profits had during-the relevant assessment years been credited to the respective accounts of the beneficiaries, it was the beneficiaries in whose hands the income was to be assessed. CIT v. Kamalini Khatau (1994) 209 ITR 101 (SC) fol.
Judgment & Decree
Civil Appeals Nos.437 and 438 of 1986; decided on 22nd January, 1998.
Discretionary trust
Amount actually received by beneficiaries
Can be assessed in the hands of beneficiaries
No principle that only trustee can be assessed
Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss. 161 &
164. Held, that even if the trust in question had to be regarded as a discretionary trust inasmuch as the profits had during-the relevant assessment years been credited to the respective accounts of the beneficiaries, it was the beneficiaries in whose hands the income was to be assessed. CIT v. Kamalini Khatau (1994) 209 ITR 101 (SC) fol. The Income-tax Tribunal in respect of the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 had referred three questions of law to the High Court for its opinion. The main controversy before the High Court was with regard to the applicability of section 161 or 164 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with regard to the assessment of the profits.. The question was whether on the distribution of the profits amongst. the beneficiaries the assessment was to be made under section 161 or whether the trust was to be assessed under section 164 as an association of persons for the reason that it was a discretionary trust. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and we find that even if the trust in question is regarded as a discretionary trust inasmuch as the profits have during the relevant assessment years been credited to the respective accounts of the beneficiaries, therefore, in view of the decision of this Court in CIT v. Kamalini Khatau (1994) 209 ITR 101, it is the beneficiaries in whose hands the income will be assessed. That being so, the appeals are allowed and the questions of law referred by the Tribunal have to be answered in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs. M.B.A./3297/FC Appeals allowed.