Estate duty on alleged jewellery fails where revenue cannot prove deceased's ownership at death.

A prior wealth statement valuing jewellery at Rs. 50,000 did not, by itself, prove that the deceased still owned jewellery of that value at death. A partition deed executed about fifteen months earlier showed family jewellery of Rs. 18,700, divided between the deceased and his son, and there was no material proving that jewellery worth Rs. 33,000 remained in the deceased's possession when estate duty was sought to be levied. The burden therefore remained on the revenue to establish ownership at death, and that burden was not discharged. The alleged jewellery was accordingly not liable to estate duty.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sum of Rs. 33,000 could be brought to estate duty as jewellery allegedly owned by the deceased.

Analysis: A prior wealth statement showing jewellery valued at Rs. 50,000 did not by itself establish that the deceased continued to own jewellery of that value at the time of death. The partition deed, made about fifteen months before death, showed that the family jewellery then stood at Rs. 18,700 and had been divided between the deceased and his son. On these facts, the burden lay on the department to prove that jewellery worth Rs. 33,000 was in the deceased's possession at death, and there was no material to support that conclusion.

Conclusion: The issue is answered in favour of the assessee and against the department; the sum of Rs. 33,000 is not liable to be charged in respect of the alleged jewellery.

Ratio Decidendi: A prior declaration of jewellery value is not conclusive of ownership at death, and the burden remains on the revenue to prove that the property was in the deceased's possession when duty is sought to be levied.

---