<?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>1986 (3) TMI 57 - PATNA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26498</link>
    <description>Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applies only where the donee does not bona fide assume possession and enjoyment of gifted property immediately and thereafter retain it to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. Cash gifted by the deceased was invested by the son in his own name and the certificates remained in his custody; the fact that interest was sometimes credited to the donor&#039;s or a joint account did not, by itself, prove an enforceable or real benefit to the donor. As no evidence showed that the deceased withdrew or used the interest, the burden of proving donor benefit was not discharged, and the amount was held excludable from the principal value of the estate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:45:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=65496" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (3) TMI 57 - PATNA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26498</link>
      <description>Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 applies only where the donee does not bona fide assume possession and enjoyment of gifted property immediately and thereafter retain it to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. Cash gifted by the deceased was invested by the son in his own name and the certificates remained in his custody; the fact that interest was sometimes credited to the donor&#039;s or a joint account did not, by itself, prove an enforceable or real benefit to the donor. As no evidence showed that the deceased withdrew or used the interest, the burden of proving donor benefit was not discharged, and the amount was held excludable from the principal value of the estate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>