https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66890 A female member of a Hindu undivided family who was not a coparcener could not have her share re-determined by a further notional partition on her death. Applying section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, the Tribunal treated only the interest actually crystallised in her hands as passing, namely 1/6th of the family property, and rejected any larger estate-duty charge. It also held that sections 7 and 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act could not be applied in the same manner as for a male coparcener, so the shares of lineal descendants were wrongly included for rate purposes. en-us Wed, 23 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Mar 2011 10:20:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66890 A female member of a Hindu undivided family who was not a coparcener could not have her share re-determined by a further notional partition on her death. Applying section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, the Tribunal treated only the interest actually crystallised in her hands as passing, namely 1/6th of the family property, and rejected any larger estate-duty charge. It also held that sections 7 and 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act could not be applied in the same manner as for a male coparcener, so the shares of lineal descendants were wrongly included for rate purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 23 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66890