9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (7) TMI 169X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... within a period of two years from the date of death of deceased. Mur. Singh for the Revenue argued that the deceased had made withdrawals of Rs. 20,995, Rs. 24 986 and Rs. 27,394 in the various asst. yrs. 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78. In asst. yr. 1978-79, the withdrawal was Rs. 41,951. Mr. Singh drew our attention to the order of the Asstt. CED. Mr. Singh aruged that between the period from Apri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so made by the Asstt. CED and holding that there was no gift either to the grand-daughter or to the son or the grand-sons and that the various with-drawls represented expenditure in the normal course and that the expenditure we related to an in connection with the marriage of grand-daughter. 2. Mr. Ranka for the accountable Person argued by placing copies of the various accounts showing the with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In respect of the other two items of Rs.16,200 and Rs.6,300 Mr. Ranka drew our attention to the varies copies of accounts filed. Mr. Ranka, therefore, argued that in view of these facts, the Appellate Controller of Estate Duty had come to the right conclusion that there was no gift and had rightly deleted the addition made by the Asstt. CED. 3. We have heard the rival submissions. The details as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
