https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20867 A Mahant who merely managed Math property under established Guru Parampara held no absolute ownership in the property. His rights were limited to maintenance, residence, and nomination of a successor, which were co-existing incidents of the office and not transferable interests passing on death. Because any such interest could not be effectively computed under section 40 of the Estate Duty Act, the property was not brought within the charge of estate duty. Recitals in the will describing him as owner did not change the true legal character of the Math property. en-us Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 16:38:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20867 A Mahant who merely managed Math property under established Guru Parampara held no absolute ownership in the property. His rights were limited to maintenance, residence, and nomination of a successor, which were co-existing incidents of the office and not transferable interests passing on death. Because any such interest could not be effectively computed under section 40 of the Estate Duty Act, the property was not brought within the charge of estate duty. Recitals in the will describing him as owner did not change the true legal character of the Math property. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20867