9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (4) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tainable. 2. The facts in the background pertaining to the issue are in short compass. As per return of estate duty filed by Mr. Deepak Sharma, a provisional demand of Rs. 37,102 was created and when the accountable person was required to deposit the same, he vide his letter dated 13-3-1980 submitted to the Assistant Controller that the said amount of Rs. 37,102 may kindly be recovered out of two life insurance policies of the deceased, respectively, for Rs. 23,000 and Rs. 8,000, numbers of which were given in the said letter. Since, the LIC authorities, as per the order of the Assistant Controller levying the penalties, admitted only liability of Rs. 2,446 for balance amount of estate duty in sum of Rs. 32,210, the Assistant Controller l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated amounts to Rs. 37,102. (ii) The deceased, Shri Romesh Dutt Sharma, who died on 9-6-1979 held the following two policies numbering 23643630 for Rs. 23,000 and 23266432 for Rs. 8,000. (iii) On 13-3-1980 when the accountable person was required to explain non-deposit of provisional tax, he made a request to the Assistant Controller to collect the same from the LIC. (iv) Initially the Assistant Controller collected Rs. 2,446 from the LIC and, therefore, for balance he levied the penalties consecutively twice, viz., of Rs. 3,400 and Rs. 5,000. (v) The Assistant Controller subsequently collected Rs. 21,262 on 14-5-1982 and Rs. 1,152 on 15-4-1983. (vi) The two appeals of the accountable person were decided by the Controller, respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred to above, is misplaced because they are entirely on different issue. Once the Assistant Controller had been requested to recover the amount from the LIC and he could recover to the extent of about Rs. 25,000, the accountable person could not be treated in default for the entire amount and levying of two penalties on the basis of non-deposit of Rs. 4,656 was hardly called for. There is no controversy about the fact that the progress of recovery of estate duty from the LIC by the Assistant Controller was not even intimated to the accountable person as stated at bar by the learned counsel for the accountable person. The accountable person was all through pressed for total amount inclusive of penalties, which was certainly very harsh, when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
