Estate duty rate aggregation for lineal descendants upheld as a valid classification under the constitutional equality guarantee.

Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act was upheld as a valid rate-fixing provision, not as a separate charge on the property of lineal descendants in Mitakshara joint family property. The classification between a coparcener dying with lineal descendants and one dying without them was found to rest on a reasonable differentia linked to the statutory object of correcting disparity in the incidence of duty and reducing inequalities in wealth distribution. The provision was held to operate within the legislative scheme and not to exceed section 5 or offend article 14. The constitutional challenge therefore failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, which requires aggregation of the interests of lineal descendants in Mitakshara joint family property for rate purposes, is ultra vires section 5 of the Act and violative of article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis: The provision was treated as part of the scheme for determining the rate of estate duty and not as imposing a separate charge on the property of lineal descendants. The classification between a coparcener dying with lineal descendants and one dying without them was held to rest on a reasonable differentia connected with the statutory object of removing disparity in the incidence of duty and reducing inequalities in wealth distribution. The provision was found to operate within the legislative scheme and not to transgress the charging section. The Court preferred the line of authority upholding the validity of the provision and rejected the contrary view of the Madras High Court.

Conclusion: Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act is valid and does not violate article 14 of the Constitution of India; the challenge to the provision fails.

---