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

1984 Supreme(Cal) 8

C.K.BANERJEE, DIPAK KUMAR SEN
CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY – Appellant
Versus
HULASCHAND BAID – Respondent


DIPAK KUMAR SEN, J.

( 1 ) THIS reference arises out of assessment to estate duty of the estate of late Punam Chand Baid, who died on September 26, 1960. The facts found or which are matters on record are, inter alia, as follows; during his lifetime the deceased made a gift of Rs. 1,50,000 on August 25, 1955, to one Hulaschand Baid, the accountable person, by entries in the books of account of his money-lending business transferring the amount in favour of the donee. The amount remained in the said business thereafter to the credit of the donee till the death of the deceased. On February 12, 1956, the deceased adopted the donee as his son, after which the business was carried on by a HUF consisting of the deceased and the donee.

( 2 ) IN assessing estate duty, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty held that as the deceased was. a coparcener and the karta of the HUF, he was not entirely excluded from the possession and enjoyment of the amount of the gift. He also found that the loan was carrying interest at the rate of 4. 1/2% which was lower than the usual market rate. He concluded that bona fide possession and enjoyment of the property given in gift was not retained by the done










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