TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the deceased's interest in the bigger Hindu undivided family passed on death as one-third or only one-sixth; and whether the entire property of the smaller Hindu undivided family passed on death. (ii) Whether section 6 or section 7 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applied to the respective properties.
Issue (i): Whether the deceased's interest in the bigger Hindu undivided family passed on death as one-third or only one-sixth; and whether the entire property of the smaller Hindu undivided family passed on death.
Analysis: The deceased was the coparcener in the bigger Hindu undivided family, while his wife was only a member and not a coparcener during his lifetime. On a notional partition immediately before death, the deceased's share in the bigger Hindu undivided family was one-third, and that was the interest that ceased on death. As regards the smaller Hindu undivided family, the deceased was the sole coparcener and had complete disposing power over the entire property. The will did not alter the position for estate duty purposes.
Conclusion: The deceased's share in the bigger Hindu undivided family was one-third, not one-sixth, and the entire property of the smaller Hindu undivided family passed on his death.
Issue (ii): Whether section 6 or section 7 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applied to the respective properties.
Analysis: Section 6 applied where the deceased was competent to dispose of the property at death, which covered the smaller Hindu undivided family property because he was the sole coparcener. Section 7 applied to the deceased's cesser of interest in the bigger Hindu undivided family property, because the benefit accrued to the surviving member on death. The statutory scheme of deemed passing and cesser of coparcenary interest supported inclusion of both items in the estate.
Conclusion: Section 6 applied to the smaller Hindu undivided family property, and section 7 applied to the deceased's interest in the bigger Hindu undivided family property.
Final Conclusion: The estate duty reference was answered for the Revenue, with the deceased's one-third interest in the bigger Hindu undivided family and the whole of the smaller Hindu undivided family property held includible in the estate.
Ratio Decidendi: A Hindu widow is not a coparcener during her husband's lifetime, and where the deceased is the sole coparcener of a Hindu undivided family, the entire property is deemed to pass on death under section 6; where the deceased's coparcenary interest ceases in joint family property, the relevant share is ascertained on a notional partition immediately before death under section 7 and section 39(1).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
