https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27671 Under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the deceased coparcener's interest in Mitakshara joint family property was held to fall within section 7(1), because that provision covers both cessation of the deceased's interest on death and the statutory inclusion of coparcenary interest; the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was treated as creating only a notional partition. The Court also held that section 34(1)(c), as amended, required aggregation of the interests of lineal descendants in the joint family property for rate purposes, and the exemption for other coparceners did not prevent such aggregation. Both questions were answered in favour of the Revenue. en-us Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 Feb 2010 12:51:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27671 Under the Estate Duty Act, 1953, the deceased coparcener's interest in Mitakshara joint family property was held to fall within section 7(1), because that provision covers both cessation of the deceased's interest on death and the statutory inclusion of coparcenary interest; the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 was treated as creating only a notional partition. The Court also held that section 34(1)(c), as amended, required aggregation of the interests of lineal descendants in the joint family property for rate purposes, and the exemption for other coparceners did not prevent such aggregation. Both questions were answered in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27671