Case Details

Citation(s)
1972 SLG 406 1972 SLD 406 (1972) 83 ITR 445
Kerala High Court
O.P. No. 2392 OF 1969 APRIL 7, 1971
M.U. ISAAC, J.
T.R. Govinda Warrier for the Petitioner. P.K. Krishnankutty Menon for the
Respondent.

T.R. Jayasankar

v.

Assistant Controller of Estate Duty

Law:

Section:

Section 34 read with section 5 and 35 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Aggregation of estate - Deceased and her two minor children formed Marumakkathayam tarward - Assistant Controller fixed value of whole property belonging to tarwad of deceased at Rs. 1,05,012 and value of one-third share which deceased would have got on a partition at below taxable limit - Thereafter by applying sub-sections(1)(c) and (2) of section 34 he levied duty on one-third share at rate applicable to aggregate value of property belonging to deceased and her lineal descendants - Whether if a taxation law is based on a general classification it cannot be attacked on ground that it would affect discriminately on some persons or group of persons who would fall into a class on a further sub-classification, on account of certain special features attached to them - Held, yes - Whether words 'coparcenary interest' used in section 34(1)(c) have been used in relation to all Hindu families governed by any one of three systems of law expressly mentioned therein, and, therefore, in that context, mean only 'joint interest' or 'undivided interest' - Held, yes - Whether if property passing on death of deceased is not chargeable under Act, as its principal value falls below chargeable limit, there is no question of rate of duty - Held, yes - Whether, since in instant case, principal value of estate of deceased was admittedly far below taxable limit, assessment made on accountable person could not be sustained - Held, yes FACTS The deceased and her two minor children formed a Marumakkathayam tarwad. On the death of the deceased, the accountable person (petitioner) contended that the deceased had only one-third right in the tarwad property, and that he was not liable to estate duty as the principal value of the said one-third right was below taxable limit. The Assistant Controller, however, assessed the petitioner to pay duty, and in doing so, he fixed the value of the whole property belonging to the deceased toward above Rs. 1 lakh and the value of the one-third share which the deceased would have got on a partition below taxable limit. He took the view, that sub-sections (1)(c) and (2) of section 34…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492