https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12777 Property that had vested in the sovereign by an act of State during the merger of the Rajpipla State and Sagbara with the Province of Bombay did not pass on the deceased's death for estate duty purposes. Because the later restoration in 1958 was treated as a fresh grant, the deceased had no subsisting proprietary right or property capable of disposition at death. Section 5 of the Estate Duty Act applied only to property actually passing on death, and section 6 did not assist the Revenue where no such property remained with the deceased. No estate duty was payable. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 May 2009 10:15:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12777 Property that had vested in the sovereign by an act of State during the merger of the Rajpipla State and Sagbara with the Province of Bombay did not pass on the deceased's death for estate duty purposes. Because the later restoration in 1958 was treated as a fresh grant, the deceased had no subsisting proprietary right or property capable of disposition at death. Section 5 of the Estate Duty Act applied only to property actually passing on death, and section 6 did not assist the Revenue where no such property remained with the deceased. No estate duty was payable. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12777