Estate duty on accrued commission, coparcenary interest, and death-linked share depreciation required partial remand for valuation.

Accrued commission for services rendered was treated as property in praesenti for estate duty purposes and was includible in the estate, even though quantification and payment were deferred. The deceased's interest in the properties of the smaller and bigger Hindu undivided families was held to pass in full, because he was the sole surviving coparcener and the wife and daughter had no independent right to demand partition. On valuation of equity shares, depreciation caused by the death itself had to be considered under the valuation provision, and the issue was remitted for fresh consideration with an opportunity to adduce material.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether commission accrued to the deceased during his lifetime and was includible in the property passing on death; (ii) whether the deceased's interest in the properties of the smaller Hindu undivided family and the bigger Hindu undivided family passed in full or only to a limited extent; and (iii) whether the valuation of the equity shares had to take into account depreciation in value caused by the death of the deceased.

Issue (i): whether commission accrued to the deceased during his lifetime and was includible in the property passing on death.

Analysis: The commission was payable for services rendered under the employment agreement and was not made conditional upon finalisation of accounts. The deceased acquired a beneficial interest as soon as the services were rendered, even though quantification and actual payment were deferred. The distinction between accrual of income and existence of a beneficial interest in property was applied against the claim that the amount had not passed on death.

Conclusion: The commission was includible in the property passing on death, against the appellant.

Issue (ii): whether the deceased's interest in the properties of the smaller Hindu undivided family and the bigger Hindu undivided family passed in full or only to a limited extent.

Analysis: The deceased was the sole surviving coparcener; the wife and daughter had no independent right to demand partition. In that situation, the whole property was treated as passing on death. The attempt to limit the passing to a fractional share was rejected, and the authorities relied on by the appellant were held inapplicable on the facts.

Conclusion: The whole of the relevant coparcenary interest was held to pass on death, against the appellant.

Issue (iii): whether the valuation of the equity shares had to take into account depreciation in value caused by the death of the deceased.

Analysis: While market price at the date of death is the general rule, the proviso to section 36(2) requires depreciation caused by the death itself to be taken into account. The matter had not been examined on that footing, and the record was insufficient to determine whether the shares had in fact depreciated by reason of the death. The valuation issue therefore required reconsideration after giving both sides an opportunity to adduce material.

Conclusion: The valuation issue was remitted for fresh consideration, in favour of the appellant to that extent.

Final Conclusion: The dismissal of the appellant's substantive challenges on commission and family property left only the valuation question open for reconsideration, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal and remand on that limited aspect.

Ratio Decidendi: A right to receive commission that has accrued on rendering services constitutes property in praesenti for estate duty purposes, and where the death of the deceased itself causes depreciation in share value, that depreciation must be considered in fixing the principal value under the valuation provision.

---