Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessment under the Estate Duty Act was invalid because it was made on the basis of an estate account filed by the brother of the deceased, when the brother was claimed to be the accountable person.
Analysis: The definition of "accountable person" in section 2(12A) had to be read with section 53(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which fastens liability on persons in whom the property passing on death vests or who otherwise receive it. The finding that there had been a partition long before the death of the deceased and that no reunion had been established was a binding finding of fact. On those facts, the property on death passed to the widow and not to the brother. The brother was also not accountable merely because he managed the partnership affairs, since section 53(1) does not make a person accountable when he acts only as an agent in management.
Conclusion: The brother was not the accountable person, and the assessment based on his return was bad in law.
Final Conclusion: The reference was answered in favour of the assessee, and the departmental challenge to the validity of the assessment failed.
Ratio Decidendi: For estate duty liability, only a person who falls within the statutory definition of accountable person under section 2(12A), read with section 53(1), can validly furnish the return or be fastened with the assessment; mere management of property as an agent does not create such liability.