9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of whether a refunded sum by the Income-tax Department to the widow of a deceased individual, several years after the death of the deceased, constitutes part of the estate of the deceased passing on his death to the accountable person under section 5(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. Analysis: The case involved a situation where a deceased individual, Col. Ajit Prasad, had a sum of Rs. 20,708 retained by the Income-tax Department towards outstanding income tax. After his death, his widow, the accountable person, successfully applied to set aside the ex parte assessment orders against her husband, resulting in a refund of Rs. 28,574, which included the amount retained by the Income-tax Department and additional tax deducted from the deceased's salary. The primary issue was whether this refunded sum formed part of the deceased's estate passing on his death to the accountable person. The accountable person argued that since the amounts were received after a significant period following the deceased's death, they should not be considered part of his estate. She contended that the deceased never claimed the amount during his lifetime, and it was her efforts that led to the refund. However, the court rejected this argument, emphasizing that the accountable person acted as the legal representative of her deceased husband when applying to set aside the assessment orders. The court noted that the refunded amount was rightfully due to the deceased, even though the refund occurred posthumously due to the delay in setting aside the assessment orders. The court referred to the definition of property passing on death under the Estate Duty Act, which includes property passing immediately or after a certain period following death. Despite the contingency of the deceased's right to receive the refunded sum being realized after his death, the court held that the sum was rightfully treated as part of the deceased's assets passing on his death to the accountable person. The court concluded that the sum of Rs. 28,574 was correctly considered part of the deceased's estate under section 5(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. In conclusion, the court answered the question in the affirmative, favoring the Department, and directed the parties to bear their own costs.
|
