Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLG 1479 1992 SLD 1479 (1992) 194 ITR 688
Bombay High Court

MRS. SUJATA MANOHAR AND T.D. SUGLA, 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.

D.A. Gandhi

Law:

Section:

Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Gift - Where donor not entirely excluded - Deceased at one time was owner to extent of one-third of three properties-A, B and C - By release deed, deceased released her one-third share in above three properties in favour of her two sons in 1957, more than two years prior to her death, in consideration of their paying to her Rs. 600 per month during her lifetime and for payment of said amount a charge was created on property C - Further property A was made over to deceased for her residence during her lifetime and up to her death - Income from C property was Rs. 311 per month - Whether there was no charge on B property for maintenance of deceased nor had she retained any interest in said property in any manner after release deed and up to time of her death and, therefore, her one-third share in it did not pass on her death - Held, yes FACTS The deceased was the owner to the extent of one-third of three properties - A, B and C. By a release deed, the deceased released her one-third share in the above properties in favour of her two sons in 1957, more than two years prior to her death in consideration of their paying to her Rs. 600 per month during their lifetime and for the payment of the said amount a charge was created on the property C. Further property A was made over to the deceased for her residence during her lifetime and up to her death. The accountable person claimed that one-third share of the deceased in the B property did not pass on the death of the deceased and hence the value of the same was not includible in the estate of the deceased. Both the Assistant Controller and the Appellate Controller disallowed the accountable person's claim holding that there was a charge on C property for payment to the deceased of a monthly maintenance of Rs. 600 and as the income from C property was only Rs. 311 per month, the balance amount of monthly maintenance might have come from the income of the B property. On second appeal, the Tribunal allowed the accountable person's claim holding that there was no charge on B property for the maintenance of the deceased nor had she retained any interest in the said property in any…
πŸ”’
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