Estate duty recovery cannot be defeated by alleging delay or prejudice where no mandatory auction irregularity is proved.

Liability for estate duty under section 53 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 extends to the legal representative and to a person deriving title to the deceased's property, to the extent of assets received. A transferee who acquired the property by gift during the pendency of the proceedings could not avoid recovery or resist interest on the ground of delay and prejudice. The auction sale was also not shown to be a nullity, because no breach of a mandatory requirement in the sale process was established and the challenge to the deposit and extension of time lacked supporting material. The writ petition was therefore rejected and the recovery action sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the auction sale held in the certificate proceeding was liable to be quashed as a nullity, and whether the petitioner could avoid liability on the ground that delay in the proceedings caused higher interest and prejudice.

Analysis: The liability to realise estate duty arose under section 53 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which makes the legal representative and a person deriving title to the deceased's property accountable for the duty to the extent of the assets received. The petitioner had acquired the property through a gift from the legal representative during the pendency of the proceeding and could not disown responsibility for the duty or complain of interest accruing by reason of the delay. The record also did not show any breach of a mandatory provision in conducting the auction sale, and the challenge to the auction purchaser's deposit and the extension of time was unsupported by material before the higher revenue authorities.

Conclusion: The auction sale was not shown to be a nullity, and the challenge to the sale failed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was rejected, and the auction sale and consequential recovery action were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A person who has acquired the deceased's property and is accountable under section 53 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 cannot avoid recovery proceedings or invalidate an auction sale merely by alleging delay or prejudice, absent proof of breach of a mandatory legal requirement in the sale process.

---