| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 1728 1981 SLD 1728 (1981) 130 ITR 515 |
Madhya Pradesh High Court
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CASE No. 473 OF 1972
G.L. OZA AND G.G. SOHANI, JJ.
Bagadia for the Controller. K.A. Chitale for the Accountable Person
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CASE No. 473 OF 1972
G.L. OZA AND G.G. SOHANI, JJ.
Bagadia for the Controller. K.A. Chitale for the Accountable Person
Controller of Estate Duty
v.
B.K. Tiwari
Law:
Section:
Section 7, read with section 6 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Interest ceasing on death - Deceased was karta of a HUF - Two house properties were standing in names of wife and son of deceased - Assistant Controller on finding from income tax records that income from those properties that income from those properties was shown in return of HUF, held that properties were acquired of funds of HUF and on that basis taxed on one third share of estate passing of deceased's death - Tribunal as well as Appellate Controller assumed that even if income was assessed for purpose of income-tax in HUF, still as deceased was not competent to dispose of property, with aid of section 6, properties could not be brought within taxable properties passing on death of deceased - Whether section 6 could not be attracted merely on assumption made by appellate authorities - Held, yes - Whether since Appellate Controller and Tribunal had assumed properties to be those of HUF but they had not given any finding of fact, it was not justifiable to answer question referred by applying section 7 as all facts necessary for consideration of application of section 7 were not found by Tribunal - Held, yes [Additional statement of case called for] Section 64 of Estate Duty Act, 1953 - High Court - Reference to - Whether if statement of case sent by Tribunal does not state questions on fact properly determined which is necessary to decide reference, High Court can direct Tribunal to modify statement of case or submit a supplementary statement of case - Held, yes FACTS The deceased died on 4-6-1964. The Controller included the two house properties in the estate of the deceased and taxed on one-third share of the estate. The first house property stood in the name of son of the deceased, and the second in the name of wife of the deceased. It was claimed before the Assistant Controller that these two properties were owned and possessed by these two individuals with full right of disposition and the deceased had no power to alienate them and, therefore, these did not come within the framework of section 6. According to the accountable person, the source of investment for the purchase of these…
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