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 a partition or relinquishment by a coparcener within two years of death, under which he takes less than his due share and the other coparcener benefits, amounts to a "disposition" of property within Explanation 2 to section 2(15) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 so as to attract estate duty under sections 5, 9(1) and 27(1).
Analysis: The statutory scheme treats estate duty as a levy on property passing on death and uses inclusive definitions and deeming provisions to enlarge the concept of "property" and "disposition". Explanation 2 to section 2(15) deems the extinguishment at the expense of the deceased of a debt or other right to be a disposition in favour of the beneficiary, and section 27 treats dispositions made in favour of relatives as gifts unless made for full consideration. In the case of a bona fide partition, although no transfer occurs in the ordinary sense of Hindu law, the deceased's voluntary acceptance of a substantially smaller share than his entitlement results in an extinguishment of his right to the extent of the benefit conferred on the other coparcener. The Court held that this is covered by the wide language of the deeming provision and is not excluded by the absence of a conventional transfer. The requirement of bona fides in section 9 concerns dispositions outside the two-year window, while dispositions within two years of death are caught by the charging scheme irrespective of bona fides.
Conclusion: Such a partition or relinquishment is a disposition within the extended meaning of the Act and the resulting benefit to the relative is liable to estate duty.