Case Details

Citation(s)
1986 SLG 1620 1986 SLD 1620 (1986) 159 ITR 634
Patna High Court
CWJC No. 1187 OF 1982 APRIL 9, 1985
S.S. SANDHAWALIA, C.J. AND N.P. SINGH, J.

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

Ram Ayodhya Rai Alias Jhulan Rai

v.

State of Bihar

Law:

Section:

Section 53, read with section 73, of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Persons accountable and their duties and liabilities - One D died leaving B as his legal heir - During pendency of certificate proceedings for recovery of estate duty on the death of D, B died and in certificate proceedings petitioner was substituted in her place - Before her death B had gifted impugned properties to petitioner - Petitioner filed a writ for quashing auction sale of properties left by D, in connection with a certificate proceeding on two grounds, viz., (i) delay in disposal of certificate case due to negligence of the department causing great prejudice to the petitioner compelling to pay interest for the pendency period, and (ii) as the auction purchaser failed to deposit the balance amount by the date fixed by the Certificate Officer auction sale was void - Whether sale was a nullity and liable to be set aside - Held, on facts, no Facts One D died leaving behind B as heir and legal representative. In certificate proceedings against B for the recovery of estate duty on the death of D, the petitioner was substituted for B as B died during the pendency of the certificate case. Before her death B executed a deed of gift in favour of the petitioner in respect of properties which originally belonged to aforesaid D. In due course, several items of properties, which originally belonged to D, were put on sale for realisation of the dues aforesaid along with interest. The impugned sale was held on 11-4-1980. The highest bid of one X was accepted and he deposited one-fourth of the bid money same day and was directed to deposit the balance amount. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid sale was a nullity, and, as such, liable to be set aside. The petitioner filed appeal before the collector against the aforesaid order which was dismissed as time barred. Revision applications before the Commissioner of the Division and the Member, Board of Revenue were also dismissed. In the writ proceedings, the petitioner made two submissions, viz., (i)the delay in the disposal of the certificate case was primarily due to the negligence on the part of the Estate Duty Department which was making prayer…
🔒
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