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

1973 Supreme(P&H) 98

HARBANS SINGH, PREM CHAND JAIN
Controller Of Estate Duty – Appellant
Versus
Ved Parkash Jain – Respondent


Judgment

1. This reference under Section 64(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "), has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, on the application filed by the Controller of Estate Duty, requesting the Appellate Tribunal to refer to this court a question of law which is said to have arisen out of the Tribunals order in EDA No. 2 of 1969-70. The Tribunal has referred the following question of law for our opinion :

" Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the share of goodwill of a deceased partner in the assets of a firm passes on his death under the Estate Duty Act ?"

2. The facts of the case are as follows:

3. One Hari Ram was partner in the firms of Messrs. Hari Ram Kishori Lal and Messrs. Ved Parkash Vijay Kumar. He died on 26th April, 1966. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty made an addition of Rs. 17,251 in the principal value of his estate representing his share of goodwill in the said two firms, in the following manner :

M/s. Hari Ram Kishori Lal Rs.8,134

M/s. Ved Parkash Vijay Kumar Rs.8,917

4. On appeal, the Zonal Appellate Controller of Estate Duty excluded the share of Rs. 8/134 in t





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