Case Details

Citation(s)
1972 SLG 513 1972 SLD 513 (1972) 85 ITR 25

WRIT PETITION No. 510 OF 1970, FEBRUARY 15, 1971
OBUL REDDI AND VENKATESWARA RAO, JJ.
A. Siva Rao for the Petitioner. bP. Rama Rao for the
Respondent

M.S. Narayanacharlu

VS

Assistant Controller of Estate Duty

Law:

Section:

Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - High Court - Reference to - Whether right to ask for refund of overpaid estate duty with interest thereon accrued to assessee as result of reference to High Court being answered in his favour and that right was not dependent upon date when section 64(7) was brought into force - Held, yes - In reference proceedings, High Court accepted stand of accountable person that only 1/5th share of deceased passed on death of deceased to his heirs and that alone become liable to be assessed under Act - Consequently, Assistant Controller refunded excess tax collected but he refused to grant interest on said refund to accountable person under section 64(7) on ground that these was no provision for payment of interest in Act prior to its amendment in 1958 - Held, yes - Whether since section 64(7) was introduced during pendency of assessment proceedings, it must be given effect to and, therefore, Assistant Controller erred in declining to award interest to assessee on over paid estate duty on ground that there was no provision for payment of interest in Act prior to its amendment in 1958 - Held, yes FACTS The accountable person's claim that the property in question was HUF property and the deceased was entitled to only 1/5 share of the property, was rejected and estate duty was levied of the whole estate. The accountable person paid the duty and secured reference to the High Court. The High Court accepted the stand of the accountable person that only 1/5th share of the entire estate passed on the death of the deceased to his heirs and that alone became liable to be assessed under the Act. The Assistant Controller refunded the excess tax collected. However, the accountable persons claim for interest under section 64(7) on said refund was rejected on the ground in the absence of any provision for payment of interest in the Act prior to its amendment in 1958, which came into force with effect from 1-7-1960, he was not entitled to the payment of such interest claimed by him. On writ petition : HELD The requirements of sub-section (7) of section 64 are (i ) there must be a reference to the High Court under section 64(1); and (ii) such…
🔒
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