<?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>1981 (8) TMI 16 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28849</link>
    <description>After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a widow&#039;s enforceable right to claim a share on partition is treated as property protected by s. 14(1), so the notional estate of a deceased coparcener must exclude that share; on the facts, the widow was entitled to 1/6th and only 5/6ths of the property was deemed to pass on death for estate duty. The court also held that s. 39(1) of the Estate Duty Act had to reflect that fraction, and the Tribunal&#039;s use of one-half was incorrect. Gifts to grandsons were not caught by s. 10 because the donees took immediate possession and enjoyment, and the donor&#039;s later partnership benefit was independent of the gifts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Mar 2010 11:26:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=67846" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (8) TMI 16 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28849</link>
      <description>After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, a widow&#039;s enforceable right to claim a share on partition is treated as property protected by s. 14(1), so the notional estate of a deceased coparcener must exclude that share; on the facts, the widow was entitled to 1/6th and only 5/6ths of the property was deemed to pass on death for estate duty. The court also held that s. 39(1) of the Estate Duty Act had to reflect that fraction, and the Tribunal&#039;s use of one-half was incorrect. Gifts to grandsons were not caught by s. 10 because the donees took immediate possession and enjoyment, and the donor&#039;s later partnership benefit was independent of the gifts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>