https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26940 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which aggregates the interests of lineal descendants of a deceased member of a Mitakshara, Marumakkattayam or Aliyasantana Hindu family for rate purposes, was upheld against an Article 14 challenge. The Court applied the settled test of reasonable classification, requiring an intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the statutory object, and emphasised the wide latitude available in taxation classification. It held that the burden of proving hostile discrimination is heavy, that aggregation for rate purposes is a recognised fiscal device, and that the impugned provision addresses the special features of Hindu joint family property and equalises treatment within the relevant systems of Hindu law. en-us Thu, 22 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:22:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26940 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, which aggregates the interests of lineal descendants of a deceased member of a Mitakshara, Marumakkattayam or Aliyasantana Hindu family for rate purposes, was upheld against an Article 14 challenge. The Court applied the settled test of reasonable classification, requiring an intelligible differentia and rational nexus with the statutory object, and emphasised the wide latitude available in taxation classification. It held that the burden of proving hostile discrimination is heavy, that aggregation for rate purposes is a recognised fiscal device, and that the impugned provision addresses the special features of Hindu joint family property and equalises treatment within the relevant systems of Hindu law. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Nov 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26940