9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of section 70(2) of the Estate Duty Act regarding payment of estate duty in installments. Analysis: The petitioner, as an "accountable person" under the Estate Duty Act, filed an account declaring the value of the property inherited from his deceased wife. The Assistant Controller assessed the duty on the estate, including the deceased wife's share in the Salar Jung Estate. The petitioner sought to pay the duty on immovable property in four equal annual installments under section 70(2) of the Act. The dispute arose as to whether the first installment was due on the date of the death of the deceased or the date specified in the demand notice under section 73(1). The Assistant Controller held that the petitioner was not entitled to pay in installments as more than four years had passed since the death, contrary to the petitioner's contention based on section 70(2). The key issue for consideration was the interpretation of section 70(2) of the Act, which allows for the payment of estate duty on immovable property in installments. The Court analyzed the language of the provision and related sections, emphasizing that the duty becomes payable on the date specified in the notice under section 73(1) or as per section 73(2). The Court highlighted that the option to pay in installments arises only after the notice of demand is issued, as it informs the accountable person of the sum to be paid. Therefore, the date for the first installment under section 70(2) should align with the notice date or the statutory payment date under section 73(2). The Court rejected the department's argument that the crucial date for section 70(2) is the date of the deceased's death. It reasoned that such an interpretation would render the installment provision practically ineffective in cases of delayed assessments. Emphasizing the legislative intent to provide a benefit to taxpayers, the Court held that the duty should be paid in installments beginning from the date specified in the notice. Accordingly, the Court directed the petitioner to pay the duty in four equal yearly installments starting from the date mentioned in the notice, with interest as per section 70(2. Additionally, the Court addressed the issue of a pending appeal regarding a sum due to the deceased wife, stating that the duty on that amount should not be collected from the petitioner pending the appeal. The Court clarified that the discretion to grant a stay of collection lies with the Assistant Controller under the Act. The petitioner's request for a stay on another sum was not pursued, making it unnecessary for consideration. The Court allowed the writ petition in part, directing the respondent to pay the petitioner's costs. In conclusion, the judgment clarified the interpretation of section 70(2) of the Estate Duty Act, emphasizing the timing of duty payment in installments and the importance of aligning it with the notice date. The Court upheld the petitioner's right to pay the duty in installments and addressed the issue of duty collection on pending amounts subject to appeal.
|
