Marriage expenses of daughter is not taxable as gift

[bpagrawal]

Marriage expenses of daughter are in the nature of legal obligation and such expenses are not taxable as gifts
What becomes manifest from the conspectus of above case law is that a daughter under Hindu Law had at the time of 'Manu' a right to share in the father's property along with her brothers. After a considerable passage of time, the ultimate remnant is that a father is under an obligation to maintain her within the meaning of S. 3 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act which includes the reasonable expenses of her marriage and therefore any property moveable or immovable, given to her for or at the time of marriage can not be termed as a 'gift' within the meaning of Section 122, T. P. Act as the essential ingredients of gift are conspicuous by their absence in this transaction of giving the property to the daughter by way of 'Pasupukumkuma' which is both involuntary as well as for consideration. Once the said transaction is taken out of the ambit of Section 122 of T. P. Act, it is not at all obligatory that the said document, if it is in writing, requires any registration within the meaning of Section 123, T. P. Act and u/s 17 of the Registration Act. In fact, it is quite apparent that the transaction of giving away the property by way of "Pasupukumkuma" could very well be done orally and if any instrument in writing has been brought into existence, the same does not require any registration as the said instrument can be used for the proof of transaction by way of evidence. There is yet another angle: the unregistered instrument can be used for the purpose of Section 53-A, T. P. Act as proof of part performance. In this case, admittedly, possession has been given to the daughters and in order to attract the provisions of the section53-A. T. P. Act, it is needless that the instrument should have been registered.1

AIR1980AP139
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
C.R.P. Nos. 2221, 2274, 3151 and 4004 of 1978
Decided On: 27.04.1979
Appellants: Bhubaneswar Naik Santoshrai and etc. etc.
Vs.
Respondent: The Special Tahsildar Land Reforms Tekkali and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges: C. Kondiah, C.J. and Seethram Reddy, J.
http://www.lawweb.in/2013/10/marriage-expenses-of-daughter-are-in.html