SARDAR BAHADUR S. INDRA SINGH TRUST vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGAL
What did the Supreme Court hold?
The Supreme Court held that the gift made by Sardar Ajaib Singh was valid and complete. The Court reasoned that the trust deed did not prohibit the trustees from accepting new gifts, and such acceptance for furthering the trust's objectives was permissible as long as it did not impinge on the intended charitable purposes. The Court found the High Court's reasoning that the gift did not augment the trust to be conflicting with the finding of a valid gift. If the gift was valid, the shares vested in the trust, and consequently, the dividends were the income of the trust. The Court agreed with the Tribunal that the shares were vested in the appellant trust and therefore the trust was entitled to the dividends. Since the dividend income is exempt from tax under Section 4(3)(i), the appellant is entitled to the refund claimed. The Court allowed Civil Appeal No. 1084 of 1971, discharged the High Court's answers, and answered the questions in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Sardar Bahadur S. Indra Singh Trust, a charitable trust, received a gift of 640 equity shares from one of its trustees, Sardar Ajaib Singh. Dividends accrued on these shares, and tax was deducted at source. The assessee claimed exemption for this income under Section 4(3)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and sought a refund of the tax deducted. The Income-tax Officer rejected the claim, stating the trust deed did not permit gifts from outsiders and the transfer was revocable. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee, holding the gift valid. The High Court, on reference, held the gift valid but not effective in augmenting the trust, thus denying the refund. The matter reached the Supreme Court.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the gift made by Sardar Ajaib Singh was valid and complete in law, as per Section 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922? - Assessee's contention: The gift was valid and complete. The trust deed did not prohibit the acceptance of gifts, and the trustees accepted it for furthering the trust's objectives. - Revenue's contention: The trust deed lacked a provision for receiving gifts from outsiders, making the gift invalid. Additionally, the gift was conditional and revocable. 2. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was entitled to the refund of tax deducted at source on the dividends accruing on the shares gifted by Sardar Ajaib Singh? - Assessee's contention: As the gift was valid and the shares vested in the trust, the dividend income was exempt under Section 4(3)(i), entitling them to a refund. - Revenue's contention: The High Court argued that even if valid, the gift did not augment the trust for taxation purposes, and the trustees lacked the inherent power to accept gifts without specific authorization in the deed.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 4(3)(i)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
392 SARDAR BAHADUR S. INDRA SINGH TRUST v. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BENGAL August 25, 1971 [K. S. HEGDE AND A. N. GROYER, JJ.J Gift made to charitable trust-If valid.
Income-tax Act, s. 4(.3) (i)-1/ the income of charitable trust arising from a gift will C<ugment the assessee -trust.
The assessee is a charitable trust created under two trusts deeds. One of the trustees, gifted certain fully paid up equity shares to the trust. On the said share~ dividend accrued on w.hich tax was deducted at source. The trustees claimed that the said income of the assessee was exempt from pay- ment of Income-tax in view of s. 4(3) (i) of the Act and hence they claimed refund of the tax deducted at source. The Income-tax Officer refused to grant the refund on the ground that the trust deed did nllt con- tain any provision for recei~ts of gifts from outsiders and so the gift in <JUestion was not a valid gift.
Th" Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal held the gift valid and decided against the revenue.
On reference, High Court held that the gift was a valid gift, but it d"d not have the effect of augmenting the assessee trust and the assessee was not entitled to get
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026
