The Messenger of Allah ﷺ sent Umar to collect the zakat. It was reported back that Ibn Jamil, Khalid bin Walid, and Abbas, the uncle of the Prophet ﷺ, had refused to give it.The Prophet said, "Ibn Jamil resents nothing except that he was once poor and Allah made him rich. As for Khalid, you are being unjust to him, for he has set aside his coats of mail and weapons for the cause of Allah. As for Abbas, his zakat is upon me, along with the like of it."Then he said, "Did you not know that a man's paternal uncle is like his father?"
حدثنا علي بن حفص أخبرنا ورقاء عن أبي الزناد عن الأعرج
بعث رسول الله ﷺ عمر على الصدقة فقيل منع ابن جميل وخالد بن الوليد والعباس عم النبي ﷺ فقال النبي ما نقم ابن جميل إلا أنه أن كان فقيرا فأغناه الله وأما خالد فإنكم تظلمون خالدا فقد احتبس أدراعه في سبيل الله وأما العباس فهي علي ومثلها ثم قال أما علمت أن عم الرجل صنو أبيه
Muslim and Bukhari narrated it, but it does not mention Umar, nor what was said to him about Abbas, and it states in it, "It is due from him, along with an equal amount besides it."Abu Ubayd said, "It seems to me, and Allah knows best, that he deferred the charity from him for two years due to a need that arose for Abbas, and the imam has the right to defer it as a matter of discretion, then collect it later. As for the version that says, 'It is due from him along with an equal amount,' it may be said that it is like borrowing from him the charity of two years, that year and the one before it." End of quote from Nayl Awtar, vol. 4, p. 127.The meaning of this is that they asked Khalid for zakat on his equipment, thinking that it was meant for trade and that zakat was obligatory on it, so he said to them, "There is no zakat due on it from me." So they said to the Prophet ﷺ, "Khalid has withheld zakat." He said, "You are wronging him, for he set it aside and dedicated it in the way of Allah before a full year had passed over it, so there is no zakat due on it."It is also possible that the meaning is that if zakat had been obligatory on him, he would have given it and not been stingy about it, since he had already voluntarily dedicated his wealth to Allah, so how could he be stingy about something obligatory upon him?Some have inferred from this the obligation of zakat on trade goods, and this is the view held by the majority of the early and later scholars, contrary to Dawud.