| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1988 SLG 1812 1988 SLD 1812 (1988) 173 ITR 300 |
Orissa High Court
R.C. PATNAIK AND K.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
R.C. PATNAIK AND K.P. MOHAPATRA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($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.
Dr. S.N. Sahu
Law:
Section:
Section 39 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Valuation of interest in coparcenary property passing on death - Deceased, his wife and son constituted a HUF, which owned certain property - Whether coparcenary interest of deceased which passed on his death amounted to one-third share of joint family property under section 39 - Held, yes Facts The deceased along with his wife and son were members of the HUP which owned certain property. The Assistant Controller took the view that the notional share of the deceased in the joint family property was one-half and included the value of the same in the dutiable estate of the deceased. On appeal, the Tribunal considering provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, took the view that although a wife could not demand a partition, yet if partition did take place amongst her husband and sons the wife was entitled to receive a share equal to that of a son and to hold and enjoy the same separately. The Tribunal, accordingly, held that only one-third share in this joint family property would pass on his death. On reference: Held In the instant case, the Tribunal took a correct view of law that in the case of a notional partition the deceased, his wife and son being members of HUF were entitled to one-third share each of the joint family property. The Tribunal was, therefore, justified in its conclusion that the coparcenary interest of the deceased which passed on his death amounted to one-third share of this joint family property. Case referred to CED v. Estate of Late Durga Prasad Beharilal [1979] 116 ITR 692 (AP). Arijit Pasayat for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Mohapatra, J. - The Tribunal has referred the following question under section 64(3) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ('the Act'): "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in its conclusion that the coparcenary interest of the deceased, which passed on his death, amounted to one-third share of the joint family property?" 2. A few facts are necessary to be stated. Late Gopinath Sahu died on 29-5-1976. His wife and son belonged to a HUF. While alive he had an interest in the joint family property. According to section 39 of the Act,…
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