| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1978 SLG 463 1978 SLD 463 (1978) 112 ITR 969 |
Calcutta High Court
MATTER No. 36 OF 1975, MARCH 3, 1978
DIPAK KUMAR SEN AND C.K. BANERJI, JJ.
Ajit Sengupta and Prabir Majumdar for the Controller. Kalyan Roy and R.N. Dutt for the accountable person
MATTER No. 36 OF 1975, MARCH 3, 1978
DIPAK KUMAR SEN AND C.K. BANERJI, JJ.
Ajit Sengupta and Prabir Majumdar for the Controller. Kalyan Roy and R.N. Dutt for the accountable person
Controller of Estate Duty
v.
Jyotirmoy Raha
Law:
Section:
Section 33 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 – Exemptions – Property in question was bequeathed to deceased by her husband – Till her death, part of premises was used by deceased for her own residence and other part was let out – On death of deceased, her son, accountable person, filed return of estate duty and claimed exemption in respect of that portion of property which was used by deceased for her residence under section 33(1)(n) – Tribunal allowed exemption holding that title to said premises, though qualified, vested in deceased and such title was valid and subsisting during her life-time – Whether Tribunal was justified in allowing exemption – Held, yes FACTS The property in question was bequeathed to the deceased by her late husband with a direction that on death of deceased said property would devolve on her two sons in equal shares. Till her death the deceased resided in the ground floor of the said premises and the first floor had at all material times been let out. On the death of the deceased her son, the accountable person, filed a return of estate duty and claimed exemption in respect of the portion of the said premises used by the deceased for her residence under section 33(1)(n). The Assistant Controller rejected the claim for exemption on the ground that section 33(1)(n) did not apply as the said premises, in which the deceased only had a life interest and consequently only a right of possession and enjoyment, could not be said to be property belonging to the deceased. Accordingly, he included the entire value of the said premises in computing the value of the estate. On appeal, the Appellate Controller allowed the exemption claimed under section 33(1)(n) in respect of the ground floor of the said premises used by the deceased for her residence. On further appeal, construing the bequest in favour of the deceased, the Tribunal held that the interest of the deceased in the said premises was something analogous to a widow's estate under the Hindu law of intestate succession. The Tribunal held that the title to the said premises, though qualified, vested in the deceased and such title was valid and subsisting during her life-time. The Tribunal,…
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