What is CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s authority for?

Where the shares of beneficiaries in a trust are determinate, trustees must be assessed separately for each beneficiary's share, treating each beneficiary as an individual. The income is then taxed at the marginal rate applicable to individuals, not at the maximum rate for an association of persons.

How many judgments cite CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s?

46 judgments on BharatTax cite CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s (108 ITR 555), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(1), Section 160, Section 164, Section 167B, Section 250, Section 4.

CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s (108 ITR 555)

V S TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(5), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2633/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jan 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.Vikram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT

Section 234DSection 250Section 270ASection 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(x)

…nd possible or potential beneficiaries. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC ought to have applied the ratio of the decision of the Apex court in the case of the trustees of H.E.N Nizam’s Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust – 108 ITR 555 SC. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the NFAC ought to have appreciated that the time of transfer, the Trustees are holding the Trust property for and on behalf the stated beneficiaries, who are all ‘Relatives’ to whom provision of sec 56(2)(x) will not be applicable. Subsequent possible addition to the beneficiar…

PRADYUMNA DALMIA BENEFICIARY TRUST,KOLKATA vs. ADIT(CPC)/I.T.O., WARD - 33(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1613/KOL/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Aug 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(1)Section 250

…as the income of the assessee was between ₹2 and ₹5 Crore. Before the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A), the assessee had relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: i) CIT v. Shri Krishna Bhandar Trust 201 ITR 989 (Calcutta High Court) [1993] ii) Nizam's Family Trust 108 ITR 555 (Supreme Court) iii) LR Patel Family Trust v. ITO 262 ITR 520 (Bombay High Court) iv) CIT V S.A.E. Head Office Trust 271 ITR 159 (Delhi High Court) v) DIT V. Shardaben Maftalal Trust 247 ITR 1 (Bombay High Court) 4. The Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) examined the matter. It was argued before the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) that the surcharge should be levied on the basis…

MANTIKA BENEFICIARY TRUST,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 1216/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalmantika Beneficiary Trust, D 122, Amba Bari, Jaipur – 302 012. Pan No.:Aaetm7086Q ...... Appellant Vs. Ito, Ward- 7(1), Jaipur ...... Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Rohan Sogani, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Ld

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 160Section 163Section 250Section 9

…in the status of AOP and taxed the total income for the assessment year 1997-98 at the maximum rate. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in CWT v. Trustees of H.E.H. Nizam’s Family (Remainder Wealth) Trust [1977] 108 ITR 555, held that the tax was leviable at marginal rate and not at maximum rate. The Tribunal concurred with the finding of the appellate authority. [1994] 74 TAXMAN 392 (SC) CIT vs. Smt. Kamalini Khatau Section 166, read with sections 5,161 and 164, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Trustees - Direct assessment or recovery not barred - Assessment year 196…

DINROZE ESTATE,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,NCW-9(5), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 358/CHNY/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.358/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Dinroze Estate Ito बनाम 12A, Wellington Plaza, Non -Corporate Ward-9(5), / Vs. 90, Anna Salai,Chennai-600 002. Chennai. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaad-1408-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (!"थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Venugopalan ( Ca) - Ld.Ar !"थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri D.Hema Bhupal (Jcit)- Ld.Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25-07-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-08-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2014-15 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 24-01-2023 In The Matter Of Rectification Intimation U/S 154 Issued By Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru (Cpc) On 10-07-2019.The Assessee Is Assessed As An Association Of Person (Aop). The Return Of The Estate Was Filed Considering The Provisions Of Sec. 161 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri S. Venugopalan ( CA) - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT)- Ld.Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 161Section 166

…in this year was not justified. In AYs 2011-12 to 2013-14 also, the rates adopted by the assessee were accepted. Reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CWT vs. Trustees of E.H. Nizam family (Remianidner Wealth) trust (108 ITR 555) in support of application of Sec. 161. It was held that though Trust had filed single return, the department has to pass order in the hands of the Trustees representing each beneficiary trust separately in respect of his share of income treating the status as an individual. In other words, the department has to pass that many number of assessmen…

M/S STERLING URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-6(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, the grounds of appeal are decided as follows: Ground

ITA 3282/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariit(Tp)A No.3282/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. Sterling Urban Development Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, No.8, Level-5, Prestige Nebula, Circle -6(1)(2), Cubbon Road, Bengaluru. Opp. To Income Tax Office Building, Bengaluru – 560 001. Pan : Aaacf 9183 C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Ramasubramaniyan, Ca Respondent By : Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.11.2021 O R D E R Per Chandra Poojari: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Final Order Of Assessment Dated 12.10.2018 Passed By The Dcit, Circle-6(1)(2), Bengaluru, Passed U/S. 144C R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [The Act] Relating To Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Assessee Is A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 On 12Th June 2002 Under The Name & Style “Foundation Habitats (India) Private Limited”. The Company Has Been Converted As A Spv In The Year 2006. The Assessee Is Engaged In The Activities Relating To Real Estate

For Appellant: Shri. Ramasubramaniyan, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 144C

…ents, which became vested in different persons : the 'legal ownership' in the trustee, what came to be called the 'beneficial ownership' in the cestui que trust. " Reliance was place on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CWT v. Trustees of Nizam's Trust 108 ITR 555 (SC) wherein a contention was advanced that assets held by a trustee in trust for others cannot be said to be assets " belonging to" the trustee so as to be includible in his net wealth. The assets so held "are not the trustee's property in any real sense " : they are the property of the beneficiaries and, to use the words of Lord Macnaghten in H…