Bhargava, J. - (1.) THIS is an income-tax reference wider Section 256(1) of, the Income-tax Act, wherein the following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion : . .. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the. case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that no valid gift of outhouses of the building named as 'Deep Shikha' was made, by the assessee to his wife in terms of the G.T. Act, 1958?''
(2.) THE assessee is the owner of a building known as "Deep Shikha" situated in C-Scheme, Jaipur. It has certain outhouses attached to it, THE assessee claims to have gifted the said outhouses to his wife on September 30, 1966. A declaration in writing was made on October 10, 1966, duly signed by both the assessee as well as his wife, the donee, but the same was not got registered by the assessee with the Sub-Registrar (the declaration is dated July 10, 1966, but that is only a typographical mistake). THE water receipts, electric receipts and bills are in the name of Smt. Premlata, donee, the wife of the assessee. Smt. Premlata has let out the building (said outhouses) to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, A range, Jaipur, at Rs. 800 per month with effect from June 1, 1967. THE repairs and alterations are also being done by Smt, Premlata, donee, and Smt. Premlata Nawalkha was assessed to wealth-tax on the value of outhouses. Since September 30, 1966, Smt. Premlata is in possession of the property, exercising her rights as owner and also receiving rent, whereas the rental income from these houses was assessed in the hands of the assessee in view of Section 64 of the Income-tax Act treating it as transfer by the assessee to his spouse. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, it was argued by the assessee before the Gift-tax Officer, vide his letters dated September 22, 1969, and December 22, 1969, that for the purposes of the Gift-tax Act, the gift was valid even though the declaration dated October 10, 1966, was not registered as required by Section 17 of the Registration Act and Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act and reliance was placed on G.V. Krishna Rao v. First Addl. GTO [1968] 70 ITR 812 (AP). The Gift-tax Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee and, therefore, held that there was no valid gift. The assessee being dissatisfied with the aforesaid order of the Gift-tax Officer appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, who also did not agree with the contention of the assessee and in his opinion a gift of immovable property not executed through a registered deed was void in the eye of law and dismissed the appeal. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal and urged that the aforesaid gift was a valid gift for the purpose of the Gift-tax Act, even though it may not be operative for the purpose of the Transfer of Property Act and placed reliance on G.V. Krishna Rao's case [1968] 70 ITR 812 (AP). On behalf of the respondent, it was pointed out that G.V. Krishna Rao's case [1968] 70 ITR 812 (AP) has been overruled by the Supreme Court in Goli Eswariah v. CGT [1970] 76 ITR 675 and reliance was placed an Smt. Laxmibai Narayana Rao Nerlekar v. CGT [1967] 65 ITR 19 (Mys). The Tribunal relied on Laxmibai's case and held that there would be no gift of immovable property under the general law without the deed of gift having been registered in accordance with Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act and that Smt. Premlata did not get the legal title in the said property as the transfer was not in accordance with Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act read with Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act and, therefore, there was no valid gift. The assessee moved the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act for making a reference and the learned Tribunal while disposing of that application has found that the question, of law mentioned above does arise out of the order of the Tribunal and, therefore, the same has been referred to this court for its opinion. Heard learned counsel for the assessee as well as learned counsel for the Revenue and we have also looked into the statement of the case and the annexures submitted therewith. The Gift-tax Act is a self-contained code in itself. The Legislature in its wisdom has adopted, various definitions from different Acts, but not with regard to the word "gift", e.g., Section 2, Sub-section (vii),.( for the word " company " they have said "company means a company as denned in Section 3 of the Companies Act and includes......" Similarly, in Section 2(xi), "firm" has the same meaning as assigned to it in the Indian Partnership Act. In Section 2 (xyib), " legal representative" has the meaning assigned to it in Clause (11) of Section 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. Similarly, in Section 2(xvii), "partner" has the meaning assigned to it in the Indian Partnership Act and includes.........
(3.) SECTION 2(xx) defines " previous year " in relation to any assessment year......under the Income-tax Act, whereas "gift" has been defined under SECTION 2(xii) as under: "'Gift' means the transfer by one person to another of any existing movable or immovable property made voluntarily and without consideration in money or money's worth............" The word "transfer" has not been denned, but "transfer of property" has been denned as Under : "(xxiv) 'transfer of property' means any disposition, conveyance, assignment, settlement, delivery, payment or other alienation of property and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes......" Thus, it is obvious that the Legislature did not adopt the definition of gift from the Transfer of Property Act as has been done in other cases mentioned above. From the above, it is clear that gift under Section 2(xii) includes certain transfers detailed in Section 4(1) and (2) of the Gift-tax Act also. Many acts and transactions which shall not amount to gifts under the Transfer of Property Act shall amount to gift under the Gift-tax Act. The concept of gift under the Gift-tax Act is much wider. Gift-tax Act includes many transactions and acts in its net though ordinarily they may not be necessarily covered within the definition of gift given in the Transfer of Property Act. "Gift" has been defined under the Transfer of Property Act, in Section 122, which reads as under : "122. Gift defined.--'Gift' is the transfer of certain existing movable or immovable property made voluntarily and without consideration, by one person, called the donor, to another, called the donee, and accepted by or on behalf of the donee. Acceptance when to be made.--Such acceptance must be. made during the lifetime of the donor and while he is still capable of giving. If the donee dies before acceptance, the gift is void." ;