<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2000 (4) TMI 34 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15156</link>
    <description>Estate duty payable on a deceased&#039;s estate is not deductible in computing the principal value of the estate. The statutory scheme distinguishes the estate duty charge from deductions allowed for valuation: Section 74(1) was treated as creating a first charge only on immovable property and only after debts and incumbrances admissible under Part VI, while Section 44 was confined to debts of the deceased and incumbrances created by the deceased. A post-death statutory liability to estate duty was held not to be an encumbrance deductible for valuation, so the referred question was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the accountable person.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 13:37:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=54156" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (4) TMI 34 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15156</link>
      <description>Estate duty payable on a deceased&#039;s estate is not deductible in computing the principal value of the estate. The statutory scheme distinguishes the estate duty charge from deductions allowed for valuation: Section 74(1) was treated as creating a first charge only on immovable property and only after debts and incumbrances admissible under Part VI, while Section 44 was confined to debts of the deceased and incumbrances created by the deceased. A post-death statutory liability to estate duty was held not to be an encumbrance deductible for valuation, so the referred question was answered in favour of the Revenue and against the accountable person.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15156</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>