https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29526 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act was confined to aggregation of the lineal descendants' interest in Mitakshara joint family property only for determining the rate of estate duty, and did not expand the charging provision or affect valuation or deemed passing rules. The provision was upheld as constitutionally valid because the classification was held to have a rational nexus with the Act's object of removing disparity in estate duty incidence among different schools of Hindu law. The deceased's estate and the descendants' interest were therefore rightly aggregated for rate purposes. en-us Mon, 19 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:14:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29526 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act was confined to aggregation of the lineal descendants' interest in Mitakshara joint family property only for determining the rate of estate duty, and did not expand the charging provision or affect valuation or deemed passing rules. The provision was upheld as constitutionally valid because the classification was held to have a rational nexus with the Act's object of removing disparity in estate duty incidence among different schools of Hindu law. The deceased's estate and the descendants' interest were therefore rightly aggregated for rate purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 19 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29526