9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (6) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The question reads thus : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, on the ratio of the decisions of the Supreme Court in CED v. C. R. Ramachandra Gounder (88 ITR 448) and CED v. N. R. Ramarathnam (91 ITR 1), was correct in holding : (a) that there was a mistake apparent on the face of the record in so far as its order dated Dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fect from January 1, 1948. The departmental authorities as well as the Tribunal held that the provisions of section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, were attracted inasmuch as the amounts given by way of gifts by the deceased continued to remain in the business of which the deceased was a proprietor for some time and had become and continued as partner thereafter. It appears that, at the instanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... take apparent on the face of the record in view of the aforesaid two Supreme Court decisions and, therefore, the order required to be rectified in the light of the Supreme Court judgments. Upon hearing the parties, the Tribunal passed the impugned order holding that its appellate order suffered from a mistake apparent on the face of the record in view of the two Supreme Court decisions . The Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was a proprietor or a partner up to his death, it had to be held that the appellate order passed by the Tribunal originally taking contrary view suffered from a mistake apparent on the face of the record. This being so, we have to further hold that the Tribunal was justified in rectifying the order so as to bring it in conformity with the Supreme Court decisions. The second part of the question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
