Civil death presumption can trigger estate duty, while the exact date of death remains a rebuttable evidentiary .

A presumption of civil death under section 108 of the Evidence Act can attract the charging provision of the Estate Duty Act, because "death" is not confined to natural death and the duty may arise when property passes on death. The absence of proof of the exact date of death does not by itself defeat assessment proceedings; the assessing authority may proceed on available materials and draw a rebuttable presumption as to date of death for estate duty purposes. An earlier grant of letters of administration is only evidentiary and does not conclusively fix the date of death.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the charging provision under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applied where the person was presumed dead under section 108 of the Evidence Act. (ii) Whether the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty lacked jurisdiction to initiate and continue assessment proceedings because the exact date of death was not conclusively established.

Issue (i): Whether the charging provision under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applied where the person was presumed dead under section 108 of the Evidence Act.

Analysis: The charging section fastens liability when a person dies after commencement of the Act and property passes on death. The expression 'death' was held not to be confined to natural death. A presumption of civil death under section 108 of the Evidence Act was treated as sufficient to attract the charging provision, and the inability to complete every procedural formality did not prevent the operation of the charge.

Conclusion: The Estate Duty Act applied to a case of civil death and the assessee's contention failed.

Issue (ii): Whether the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty lacked jurisdiction to initiate and continue assessment proceedings because the exact date of death was not conclusively established.

Analysis: Section 108 of the Evidence Act was held to raise a presumption only as to the fact of death after seven years and not as to the precise date of death. The authority was entitled to draw a presumption on the materials before it, determine the date of death for assessment purposes, and require the accountable person to rebut that presumption by cogent evidence. The earlier order granting letters of administration was treated only as evidence and not as a conclusive declaration fixing the date of death.

Conclusion: The Assistant Controller had jurisdiction to proceed with the assessment, subject to rebuttal by the petitioner, and no jurisdictional error was made out.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable on the jurisdictional challenge and the estate duty proceedings were allowed to continue, with the petitioner given an opportunity to rebut the presumption regarding the date of death.

Ratio Decidendi: A presumption of death under section 108 of the Evidence Act can sustain estate duty proceedings, but the exact date of death remains a matter of evidence and may be determined on the materials available unless rebutted by the accountable person.

---