TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal reconsiders inclusion of cinema goodwill in estate duty assessment, emphasizing factors beyond premises ownership.</h1> <h3>ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY. Versus NATHULAL LUNAWAT.</h3> ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY. Versus NATHULAL LUNAWAT. - TTJ 014, 554, Issues:1. Whether the firms of M/s Vimal & M/s Amar Talkies, in which the deceased was a partner, had goodwill that should be included in his estate for estate duty assessment.Analysis:The deceased was a partner in the firms of M/s Vimal & Amar Talkies, engaged in the exhibition of cinema films. The dispute revolved around the existence of goodwill in the firms following the death of the partner. The Asstt. CED contended that even businesses dealing in standard articles could have goodwill, citing a decision of the Allahabad High Court. The Asstt. CED also referred to the partnership deed clause indicating the existence of goodwill. However, the Asstt. CED rejected the argument that a deceased partner had no right in the goodwill, relying on a decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The Asstt. CED valued the deceased's share in the goodwill at Rs. 13,125 and included it in the estate.The accountable person appealed to the CED (Appeals), reiterating that the firms had no goodwill as they did not own cinema buildings and were not producers or distributors of films. The CED (Appeals) agreed, stating that any goodwill associated with the business was linked to the theatres rather than the partners. Consequently, the CED (Appeals) excluded the Rs. 13,125 from the assessment.Upon further appeal, the Tribunal reviewed the case and observed that the CED (Appeals) erred in concluding that goodwill in a cinema business required ownership of theatres. The Tribunal referenced a Supreme Court decision emphasizing that goodwill depends on various factors beyond mere ownership of premises. The Tribunal disagreed with the CED (Appeals) and held that the firms of Vimal & Amar Talkies had goodwill despite not owning cinema buildings. The Tribunal also highlighted the inconsistency in the Madras High Court's decisions on goodwill in similar cases.The Tribunal overturned the CED (Appeals) finding, directing a reassessment of whether the deceased partner's share in the goodwill should be included in the estate duty assessment. The Tribunal instructed the CED (Appeals) to consider all contentions before making a final determination on the inclusion of the goodwill value in the assessment. As a result, the appeal was partly allowed, indicating a need for further assessment on the goodwill inclusion issue.
TaxTMI 