Accrued compensation rights and foreign outstandings were held includible in the estate for estate duty purposes.

A deceased's accrued right to receive compensation for Burma lands notified during lifetime was treated as a movable asset, because no subsisting third-party right required the compensation to retain the character of immovable property; it was therefore includible in the principal value of the estate for estate duty. Burma outstandings were also held to be movable property, and since the deceased was domiciled in India, they fell within the estate duty charge under the statutory scheme; the absence of proof that the debts were excluded or unrealizable did not alter that result. Both items were accordingly included in the estate and charged to duty.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the right to receive compensation in respect of Burma lands notified during the deceased's lifetime was includible in the principal value of the estate chargeable to estate duty; and (ii) whether the Burma outstandings amounting to Rs. 77,227 were includible as movable property in the principal value of the estate.

Issue (i): whether the right to receive compensation in respect of Burma lands notified during the deceased's lifetime was includible in the principal value of the estate chargeable to estate duty.

Analysis: The right to receive compensation had accrued to the deceased at the date of death and was not shown to be subject to any third-party right or liability that would preserve the land's character for the purpose of estate duty. The distinction drawn from authorities dealing with conversion of land into money applied only where the compensation remained impressed with the quality of real estate for the protection of existing rights. In the absence of such a competing right, the deceased's entitlement to compensation was treated as a movable right and not as immovable property outside Indian estate duty.

Conclusion: The compensation right was includible in the principal value of the estate and the finding was against the accountable persons.

Issue (ii): whether the Burma outstandings amounting to Rs. 77,227 were includible as movable property in the principal value of the estate.

Analysis: The outstandings were movable property, and the deceased was domiciled in India at the time of death. Section 21(1) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 attracted liability to estate duty on such movable property. The contention that the debts were not marketable or not realizable in Burma failed for want of supporting facts, and mere difficulty in repatriation did not establish exclusion from the estate.

Conclusion: The Burma outstandings were rightly included in the principal value of the estate and the finding was against the accountable persons.

Final Conclusion: Both disputed items were held chargeable to estate duty as part of the deceased's estate, and the reference was answered in favour of the revenue.

Ratio Decidendi: A deceased's accrued right to receive compensation for land notified for acquisition is a movable asset includible in the estate unless a subsisting third-party right requires the compensation to retain the character of immovable property, and foreign outstandings are includible as movable property when the statutory conditions for estate duty are satisfied.

---