9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Inclusion of properties from a Wakf estate in the principal value of the deceased's estate. 2. Determination of the value of shares held by the deceased in a company for estate duty calculation. 3. Levying of penalty under section 73(5) of the Estate Duty Act for non-payment of estate duty. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case was the inclusion of properties from a Wakf estate in the principal value of the deceased's estate. The Deputy Controller of Estate Duty sought to include properties from Messrs. Kaja Mian Wakf Estate in the estate of the deceased. The muthavalli of the Wakf contended that the deceased had no interest in the Wakf properties, arguing against the application of section 12 of the Estate Duty Act. The Tribunal eventually held that the properties covered by the Wakf were not includible in the dutiable estate of the deceased. This decision was confirmed by the High Court, emphasizing that the Wakf property could not have been included in the estate of the deceased. 2. Another issue was the determination of the value of shares held by the deceased in Mohamed Mian Rowther & Co. (P.) Ltd. for estate duty calculation. The Deputy Controller included the total assets of the company in the principal value of the estate, but the Tribunal ruled that only the value of the 33 shares held by the deceased should be included. This decision was based on the fact that the deceased had a minority shareholding and the company was not a controlled company under section 17 of the Act. 3. The final issue revolved around the levying of a penalty under section 73(5) of the Estate Duty Act for non-payment of estate duty. The muthavalli of the Wakf estate was served with a notice demanding payment of estate duty, which was later adjusted. However, as the remaining amount was not paid within the due date, a penalty was levied. The Appellate Controller dismissed the appeal against the penalty on the grounds of default in payment before filing the appeal. The Tribunal upheld this decision, leading to a reference to the High Court. The High Court held that the appeal was indeed maintainable, as the duty was not legally leviable due to the exclusion of Wakf properties from the deceased's estate. Consequently, the Tribunal was not justified in deeming the appeal as incompetent, and the case was remanded for consideration on merits. In conclusion, the judgment clarified the non-inclusion of Wakf properties in the deceased's estate, the limited inclusion of shares in the company for estate duty calculation, and the maintainability of the appeal against the penalty for non-payment of estate duty.
|
