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

2003 Supreme(Guj) 270

K.M.MEHTA, R.K.ABICHANDANI
CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY – Appellant
Versus
GEETABEN VIPINBHAI SHAH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: MANISH R.BHATT

R. K. ABICHANDANI, J.

( 1 ) THE Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench "a" has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court under Section 64 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. "whether, in law and on facts, the Appellate Tribunal is right in holding that the interest of the wives of the co-parceners has to be excluded in determining the share of the lineal descendants which is to be included in the principal value of the estate left by the deceased for rate purposes u/s. 34 (1) (c) of the E. D. Act, 1953?"

( 2 ) THE Estate Duty account in respect of the estate of Dahyabhai Maneklal who passed away on 9. 11. 1962, was filed on 21. 11. 1963. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Ahmedabad, in the assessment order made under Section 58 (3) of the said Act worked out the value of the estate of the deceased in the H. U. F. and came to the conclusion that 1/5th share of the deceased in the HUF was of the value of Rs. 3,23,541/ -. The interest of three lineal descendants of the deceased was valued at Rs. 9,70,623/- and this exercise was done for aggregation as contemplated by the provisions of Section 34 (1) of the Act under which for the purpose of determining









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