9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the unilateral declaration made by the deceased amounted to a disposition under the Estate Duty Act, justifying inclusion in the estate duty assessment? Analysis: The judgment pertains to a reference made under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, regarding the inclusion of a property in the estate of the deceased based on a unilateral declaration made by the deceased. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty had considered the property, initially part of a Hindu undivided family (HUF), as falling under section 27 of the Act. However, the Appellate Controller disagreed, stating that the deceased's act of converting self-occupied property into joint family property did not constitute a transfer or disposition under the Act. The Tribunal upheld this view, emphasizing that there was no gift element involved in the transaction. The Revenue appealed on grounds of section 9 applicability and property valuation. The High Court considered relevant Supreme Court decisions, particularly highlighting that blending self-acquired property into joint family property does not attract estate duty under section 9 and 27 of the Act. Moreover, the High Court noted that the act of blending self-acquired property into joint family property does not extinguish the rights of the blender or confer benefits on others as per the Act's provisions. The Court referred to specific Supreme Court judgments to support its conclusion that such blending does not fall within the definition of "disposition" under the Act. Ultimately, the High Court answered the referred question in the negative, favoring the accountable person and rejecting the Revenue's stance on the inclusion of the property in the estate duty assessment. Additionally, the High Court acknowledged observations from a Supreme Court case regarding the potential impact of subsequent partition following blending of properties, highlighting the need for a closer legal and factual examination in such scenarios. However, the High Court clarified that the issue of partition and its consequences was not the subject of the reference before them, aligning with the Supreme Court's approach of not expressing an opinion on this matter. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the reference in line with its findings on the primary issue of disposition and inclusion of the property in the estate duty assessment.
|
