JUDGMENT

PATHAK, CJI. :— These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Madras dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellant against the refusal of the first respondent to rectify an assessment order and pass consequential directions.

2. Shri Anantharamakrishnan, a reputed industrialist in Tamil Nadu, died intestate in Madras on 18 April, 1964. He left behind his widow, Valli, his two sons, Sivasailam and Krishnamoorthy and two daughters, Kalyani and Seetha. Some time after his death, Sivasailam, as an accountable person rendered the estate duty account, All the heirs, other than Sri Sivasailam, who were also accountable persons wrote to the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty on 15 December, 1964 that as accountable persons they agreed to abide by the accounts- rendered by Sri Sivasailam and any explanation furnished by him with regard to the Estate Duty case would be binding on them.

3. Messrs. Amalgamations Private Ltd. (shortly referred to as Amalgamations) is a company which holds shares in most of the companies including Simpson and Company Ltd. (shortly referred to as Simpson) of the. group. By letter dated 27 April, 1965 Amalgamations informed the assessing authority that the deceased had transferred property in the form of shares in Simpson to it and that the deceased had controlling interest in that company at the time of his death. On 13 September, 1965 the assessing authority wrote to Amalgamations that the deceased had transferred 80,377 shares of Simpson, and therefore Amalgamations was controlled company within the meaning of 3. 17 of the Estate Duty Act. By virtue of S. 19(l) of the Estate Duty Act the controlled company had to be regarded as one of the persons accountable for the estate of the deceased. Amalgamations was required to submit an account of the estate. Amalgamations filed a return before the Assistant Controller. No objection was raised by the heirs of the deceased or by Amalgamations to the latter being treated as in accountable person.

4. After due enquiry the assessment of Estate Duty was completed on 27 January, 1970 and the duty payable by the estate was determined at Rs. 1,67,74,697.58, of which provisional duty had been paid in the amount of Rs. 65,50,452.73 leaving a balance of Rs. 1,02,24,244.85. The assessment order was addressed to Amalgamations as well as Sri Sivasailam as accountable persons. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty proceeded on the basis that Amalgamations was a "controlled company and the deceased had control over its affairs, and therefore valuation of the shares held by the deceased in the company had to be made in the manner laid down in Rule 15 framed by the Board under S. 30(l)(e) of the Estate Duty Act. The principal value of the assets was determined at Rs. 2,12,29,998/- and the duty was computed at Rs. 1,67,74,697.58. There was no appeal against the assessment by any of the accountable persons.

5. Kalyani Sundaram, one of the daughters of the deceased and the appellant before us, became entitled on the death of Anantharamakrishnan to a fifth share in his estate under the Hindu Succession Act. Her husband, K. S. Sundaram, as her agent constituted by power of attorney, wrote on 11June,1974 to the Assistant Controller seeking certain clarifications regarding the assessment. The Assistant Controller replied on 25 June, 1974 referring to the specific agreement of the accountable persons to abide by the accounts rendered by Sri Sivasailarn and to be bound by any explanation given by him. The Assistant Controller referred to the fact that all subsequent proceedings had been completed after discussion with Sri Sivasailam and Amalgamations and as the assessment had now become final it was not possible to enter into any discussion concerning it.

6. On 2 January, 1975 the appellants husband as agent filed an application under S-61 of the Estate Duty Act contending that the assessment order was vitiated by several errors