Foreign domicile judgments, compulsory acquisition valuation and residential exemption under estate duty law turn on statutory conditions and evidence.

Foreign judgments directly deciding domicile between the same parties may be conclusive unless a recognised exception such as lack of jurisdiction, fraud or breach of natural justice is shown; domicile of choice depends on residence plus an intention of permanent or indefinite residence. Where a deceased's property has been compulsorily acquired, valuation for estate duty follows the compensation entitlement arising from the acquisition, not an earlier approved valuer's estimate. Exemption under section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act is available only if the house or part claimed was exclusively used by the deceased for residence and the statutory conditions are proved.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the deceased had acquired an English domicile of choice and whether the foreign judgment on domicile was conclusive for estate duty purposes; (ii) Whether the value of the deceased's share in the Bareilly property had to be determined on the basis of the land acquisition compensation rather than the approved valuer's report; (iii) Whether exemption under section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act was allowable.

Issue (i): Whether the deceased had acquired an English domicile of choice and whether the foreign judgment on domicile was conclusive for estate duty purposes.

Analysis: The foreign judgment had directly adjudicated the very question of domicile between the relevant parties. The record showed that the deceased had lived in England for long periods, had applied for and obtained British nationality, and had expressly described himself as domiciled and resident in England. The statutory rule governing foreign judgments rendered such a judgment conclusive as to matters directly adjudicated upon, absent any pleaded exception such as lack of jurisdiction, fraud, or violation of natural justice. The principles of domicile required residence coupled with an intention of permanent or indefinite residence, and the evidence supported a domicile of choice in England.

Conclusion: The deceased was held to have been domiciled in England, and the foreign judgment on domicile was binding; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the value of the deceased's share in the Bareilly property had to be determined on the basis of the land acquisition compensation rather than the approved valuer's report.

Analysis: The property had been the subject of compulsory acquisition, and the deceased's transferable interest was the right to receive compensation arising from that acquisition. In such circumstances, the compensation awarded under the acquisition proceedings furnished the relevant basis for valuation. The mere absence of an appeal against the award did not justify preferring the earlier approved valuer's estimate over the acquired value reflected in the compensation award.

Conclusion: The valuation based on the approved valuer's report was rejected and the compensation-based valuation was accepted; this issue was decided in favour of the assessee.

Issue (iii): Whether exemption under section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act was allowable.

Analysis: The exemption depended on satisfaction of the statutory requirement that the house or part thereof was exclusively used by the deceased for residence. On the facts found, the claim was not shown to satisfy that requirement. The request for exemption also could not survive merely because domicile had been finally determined, since the statutory conditions for the relief were not established.

Conclusion: The claim for exemption under section 33(1)(n) was disallowed; this issue was decided against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded on the domicile and valuation issues but failed on the residential exemption claim, resulting in a partial allowance of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: A foreign judgment directly deciding domicile between the same parties is conclusive unless a recognised exception under the Civil Procedure Code is shown, and where property is compulsorily acquired, estate valuation must reflect the compensation entitlement arising from that acquisition.

---