Limitation and notice under the Estate Duty Act required reference on service, accountable persons, and assessment validity.

Limitation under section 73A of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 was treated as turning on whether time began with issuance or service of notice, and the Tribunal was required to refer that question. The article also states that notice under section 59(a) read with section 53 had to be considered in relation to all known accountable persons, because the sufficiency of notice to one versus all affected the validity of the assessment. The challenge to the assessment was consequential on those legal questions, so the Tribunal's refusal to make a reference was not justified and a reference on all three questions was directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal should be directed to refer the questions relating to limitation for commencement of proceedings, necessity of notice to all accountable persons, and the consequential validity of the assessment.

Analysis: The controversy raised a question of law on whether the limitation under section 73A of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, began with issuance or service of notice. It also raised a distinct legal issue whether notice under section 59(a) read with section 53 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 had to be served on all known accountable persons, or whether notice to one was sufficient. The challenge to the assessment was consequential upon the answers to those questions, and the Tribunal's refusal to refer was not justified.

Conclusion: The questions were held to arise from the Tribunal's order and the Tribunal was directed to make a reference on all three questions.

---