S.RAMACHANDRA.IYER, RAMAKRISHNAN
M. Ct. Muthiah – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Controller of Estate Duty, Southern Zone, Madras – Respondent
S. RAMACHANDRA IYER, C.J. :- This appeal arises out of proceedings initiated under Art. 226 of the Constitution with regard to a penalty imposed on an accounting party under the provisions of the Estate Duty Act it is unnecessary to set out in detail the history of the levy of the duty and of the payment made towards it. On the death of the father of the accounting party the estate was assessed to duty and a sum of Rs. 1,29,749.54 was found due after credit being given to a payment of a small sum. This the accounting party was directed to pay before 10-1-1959. A substantial portion of the amount, viz., Rs. 1,10,965.31 was paid within the time permitted. The accounting party then approached the authority for the grant of time for the payment of the balance. That authority granted time till 5-3-1959.
2. It will be apparent from the order granting time that the accounting party was entitled to pay the balance before the close of the day on 5-3-1959, till which date the authority itself has given time. Curiously enough on the 5th itself the Deputy Controller made an order levying a penalty of Rs. 11000 for non-payment of the balance of duty dire. There can obviously be no failu
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.