9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses continue. This case is an instance. The Controller of Estate Duty has filed this petition under section 64(3) of the Act. He prays that the Appellate Tribunal be directed to refer the following two questions for the opinion of this court: "(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in sustaining the order of the Appellate Controlle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , viz., November 9, 1982. Mr. Sawhney has referred to the decision of this court in CIT v. Prem Nath Anand [1977] 108 ITR 549. In this case, it is undoubtedly correct that a multiple of 12 had been applied. However, the rate of interest, etc., in March 1973, was much lower than in November, 1982. The Tribunal has taken the view that the rate of interest on long term fixed deposit is a relevant fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n". It was further observed that it was "just by omission that deduction has not been allowed out of the assets of the Hindu undivided family..." The order of the Controller was upheld by the Tribunal. Still further, it may be observed that the Tribunal was concerned with the valuation of interest of the deceased in the coparcenary property. It was considering the matter under section 39(1). The i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
