Law: Estate Duty Act, 1953

Section: 73

Section 73 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Recovery of duty and penalties - Whether when estate duty is to be paid in installments, date on which first installment is payable is date which is mentioned in notice under section 73(1) or date which is statutorily fixed under section 73(2) - Held, yes FACTS The petitioner was an "accountable person" within the meaning of section 53. The property in respect of which he had to pay estate duty belonged to his wife who died on 30-9-1955. She was one of the several heirs of late Nawab. The petitioner, as the person to whom the property passed on the death of his wife, filed an account on 10-2-1961, declaring Rs. 1,300 as the value of the property. But, subsequently, it was found that his deceased wife had a certain share in the Nawab's estate. This share was valued by the Assistant Controller (respondent) at Rs. 4,84,713. To this was added the sum of Rs. 1,300 which represented the value of the personal belongings of the petitioner's deceased wife. The respondent assessed the duty on the estate at Rs. 49,152. Of this Rs. 23,109 represented the duty on immovable property. A notice of demand under section 73(1) was served on the petitioner on 25-7-1963, and he was called upon to pay the duty by the 15-8-1963. After making some comparatively small payments towards the duty, the petitioner applied to the respondent to permit him to exercise the option of paying the duty, payable by him on immovable property, in four equal annual instalments. This application was based on section 70(2). The contention of the petitioner was that the first of the four yearly instalments contemplated by section 70(2) was payable on 15-8-1963, which was the date fixed in the demand notice served under section 73(1) for payment of estate duty. But the respondent did not accept this position. He took the view that the crucial date was the date of the death of the petitioner's wife. This date was 30-9-1955. As much more than four years had elapsed from that date, the Assistant Controller held that the petitioner was not entitled to claim the benefit of section 70(2). It was this order that was impugned by the petitioner in instant writ proceedings.…

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