AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ar. Lakshmanan, C.J.—We have perused the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The answer given by the Tribunal in para. 3 itself is self-evident. The Tribunal has observed that on the death of one of the beneficiaries, Smt. Sushila Devi, five per cent, share in the trust was to be allocated in the name of her heirs whatsoever may be their number and whatever may be their proportion of share in her estate dying intestate. Thus, the proportion of share given to Smt. Sushila Devi has to be distributed amongst her heirs as per the personal law of the deceased. There cannot be any doubt about the fact that merely because one of the known beneficiaries whose share is specified, dies and such beneficiary''s interest devolves on the deceased''s heir or heirs as the case may be, the specified trust would not become an unspecified trust because in place of the deceased beneficiary her legal heirs are substituted. The answer to the question being obvious, it is not required to be referred to this court.
The reference application is rejected.