COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs C.C. FAMILY TRUST and Others

R. K.. ABICHANDANI, J.

In this group of applications, the Revenue has suggested the following identical. questions, seeking a direction on the Tribunal under s. 256(2) of the Act to forward statement of case in respect thereof.

"Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the status of the assessee trust should be taken as specific trust having status of AOP with no liability to tax?"

"Whether, the Tribunal is right in law and on facts in not appreciating that the decision of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowell and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, was fully applicable and that the income was earned by AOP in the guise of the trust?"

In all these matters, the Tribunal, taking into account the fact that the shares of four out of six beneficiaries were determinate and each had twenty per cent share, came to a finding that to the extent of this eighty per cent of specified shares of the beneficiaries, the status of the assessee trust was that of a specific trust and not a discretionary trust. On the basis of this finding, the Tribunal directed that the income of the assessee to the extent of eighty per cent payable to the beneficiaries who had determinate shares should be allowed to them for assessment in their hands, while the rest of twenty per cent income of the trust was directed to be assessed at the maximum marginal rate because in respect of that portion, the shares were not determined and the trust was to that limited extent, a discretionary trust.

The decision of the Tribunal proceeds on a finding of fact that the shares of the four beneficiaries out of six were determinate and this finding is based on the material on record and there is nothing pointed out from the record to doubt its correctness. There is, therefore, no question of law arising from the order of the Tribunal and these applications are rejected. Rule is discharged in each of these matters with no order as to costs.