Just a moment...
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%
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 bar under section 73A of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 could excuse the applicant from producing the Controller's clearance certificate as a condition precedent to grant of a succession certificate under section 56(2) of the Act.
Analysis: The statutory scheme made production of the Controller's certificate mandatory in all cases where a succession certificate was sought. Section 56(2) applied without exception to such applications, while section 73A regulated the Controller's power to commence estate-duty proceedings and could not be read as overriding the applicant's obligation to comply with section 56(2). The provisions were to be harmonised, and the time-bar in section 73A could not be imported so as to defeat the express requirement that the applicant furnish the application to the Controller and obtain the requisite clearance.
Conclusion: The applicant was not entitled to bypass the statutory requirement of producing the Controller's certificate, and the civil court had no discretion to waive that condition. The objection based on section 73A failed.
Final Conclusion: The refusal to grant the succession certificate was legally ? no, legally sound, and the appeal could not succeed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute makes production of a clearance certificate an express prerequisite to grant of a succession certificate, that requirement remains mandatory and cannot be displaced by a general limitation provision governing revenue proceedings unless the statute clearly so provides.