| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 1209 1983 SLD 1209 (1983) 143 ITR 458 |
Allahabad High Court
OCTOBER 15, 1982 ED REFERENCE Nos. 233 OF 1981 AND 283 OF 1982.
H.N. SETH AND B.N. SAPRU, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
OCTOBER 15, 1982 ED REFERENCE Nos. 233 OF 1981 AND 283 OF 1982.
H.N. SETH AND B.N. SAPRU, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Controller of Estate Duty
v.
Estate of Late Col. Ajit Prasad
Law:
Section:
Section 5 of the estate duty act, 1953-Property passing on death-Whether property which belonged to huf prior to passing of the up zamindari abolition and land reforms act ceased to be huf property and belonged to coparceners as joint owners of bhumidhari rights after the enforcement of the said act-Held, yes-Whether to ascertain share of deceased in such property which passed on his death, it would have to be found whether a son was born to deceased prior to date on which the said act became applicable to area where impugned property was situate-Held, yes [case remanded back] Facts The deceased's widow, being the accountable person, claimed that among the properties left by the deceased, certain properties belonged to the deceased's HUF and the deceased had only one-sixth coparcenary share in such properties. The bhumidhari rights in respect of these properties had been acquired by the deceased and other members of the family after the UP Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1951 ('Zamindari Abolition Act') was made applicable to the concerned area. The Assistant Controller found that the land records showed the deceased and another person as co-owners. He, therefore, rejected the widow's claim that they were HUF properties, and held that the deceased had one-half share in the properties. On appeal, the Appellate Controller confirmed the order of the Assistant Controller. On further appeal, the Tribunal held that the agricultural land in dispute did not belong to the HUF but it belonged to all the coparceners who became joint owners of bhumidhari rights as one single unit. The Tribunal observed that the members of the family on whom such rights were conferred under section 18 of the Zamindari Abolition Act became the separate owners of their shares as tenants-in-common and being so, the conferment of such right on the member of the HUF could not be ' denied to him only because in the revenue records his name was not entered and names of some others entered. In view of these facts, and on consideration of the admitted genealogical table, the Tribunal held that the deceased's share in the agricultural land was one-fourth in place of one-half as taken by the…
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