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

1967 Supreme(Cal) 167

BANERJEE, K.L.ROY
Commissioner Of Wealth Tax – Appellant
Versus
Gouri Shankar Bhar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.L.Pal, D.K.Sen, S.C.Mitter, Amal Dutta

JUDGMENT

BANERJEE, J.

1. This is a reference under s. 27(1) of the WT Act, 1957. The assessment year is 1959-60, the corresponding valuation date being 31st March, 1959. The reference has been made in the circumstances hereinafter stated in brief. One Prafulla Chandra Bhar, a Hindu governed by Dayabhaga School of law, died intestate on 27th April, 1956. His mother, widow, three sons and one daughter survived him. Since the death had taken place before the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, came into operation, he was succeeded by his widow, Sm. Radha Rani Bhar, and his three sons, namely, Uma Sankar, Gouri Sankar and Durga Sankar, each inheritong one-fourth share in the estate. Gouri Sankar, a son of the deceased, took out letters of administration and filed the wealth-tax return, and his capacity as the administrator to the estate of the deceased, therein describing the status of the assessee as an HUF. The WTO also treated the status of the assessee as an HUF. He took the net value of the assets at Rs. 8,39,125 and calculated the tax payable thereon at Rs. 4,391.25 P. Gouri Sankar, as the administrator to the estate, filed an appeal before the AAC and contended : (1) that the WTO was wro

























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