SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(Kar) 17

GOVINDA BHAT, SRINIVASA IYENGAR
V. PRAMILA – Appellant
Versus
CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY – Respondent


Advocates:
K.SRINIVASAN, S.R.RAJASEKHARAMURTHY

GOVINDA BHAT, J.

( 1 ) THE Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, under S. 64 (1), Estate Duty act, 1953 (hereinafter called the Act), has stated a case and referred the following question for the opinion of this Court : " Whether on the. facts and in the circumstances of the case the estate duty payable by the accountable persoa is deductible in computing the net principal value of the estate of the deceased? "

( 2 ) ONE Varadaraja Setty died on 6-5-1965. The Accountable Person filed return before; the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty in which he. claimed that a sum of Rs. 2,59,757 should be deducted from the principal value of the estate. The said sum of Rs. 2,59,757 included a sum of Rs. 2,500 being the estimate of the estate duty payable by the Accountable Person. The assistant Controller disallowed the claim for deduction of the amount of estate duty. The Appellate Controller of Estate Duty as also the Appellate tribunal affirmed that part of the order of the Assistant Controller on tha ground that estate duty payable by the Accountable Person is not a debt or encumbrance corning within the scope of S. 44 of the Act. The short question that arises for decision is whether in de







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top