Estate duty inclusion fails where a house is solely in the wife's name and no retained proprietary benefit is proved.

A house standing solely in the wife's name was not includible in the deceased husband's estate under the Estate Duty Act because the title deed showed purchase for her own benefit, with no legal evidence that the husband supplied the consideration or retained any proprietary interest. Section 6 did not apply, as the deceased had no legal power to dispose of the property. Section 10 also failed because mere residence arising from marital cohabitation was not a retained benefit in the gifted property itself. The court further noted that section 2(15) did not assist, as no statutory conversion of the deceased's property was proved. The value of the house was therefore excluded from the principal value of the estate.

---

---

Issues: Whether house property No. 33, Apcar Garden, Asansol, could be included in the principal value of the deceased's estate as property passing or deemed to pass on death under the Estate Duty Act.

Analysis: The title deed showed a conveyance in favour of the wife alone and recited that the consideration was paid with her own money for her own benefit and enjoyment. There was no legal evidence that the husband supplied the purchase money, and no material to treat the purchase as benami. On the document, the deceased had no legal or proprietary interest and could not dispose of the property so as to attract section 6. The Court further held that section 10 was inapplicable because the statutory test concerns exclusion from the property itself and from any benefit by contract or otherwise, and not mere residence arising from marital cohabitation. The husband's going to the wife for consortium or coverture was not treated as enjoyment of the gifted property. The Court distinguished the authorities relied on by the revenue, and held that section 2(15) did not assist because the alleged conversion was not shown to be a conversion of the deceased's property within the statutory meaning.

Conclusion: The property could not be treated as property passing or deemed to pass on the deceased's death, and its value was not includible in the estate.

Ratio Decidendi: For estate duty purposes, a house standing solely in the wife's name cannot be included in the husband's estate merely because he resides there or because a familial or marital relationship exists; inclusion under section 10 requires a proprietary gift or retained benefit in the property itself, proved by legal evidence.

---