https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36066 A contingent future interest under a settlement deed did not attract estate duty where the deceased was entitled to the property only if he survived the life tenant. Because no vested interest ever arose in his favour, nothing ceased on his death for the purposes of section 7 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The alleged benefit was also not shown to be capable of valuation in the manner required by section 40, so the charging provision could not apply. The estate duty addition on the Bangalore house was therefore unsustainable. en-us Mon, 30 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Mar 2010 11:42:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36066 A contingent future interest under a settlement deed did not attract estate duty where the deceased was entitled to the property only if he survived the life tenant. Because no vested interest ever arose in his favour, nothing ceased on his death for the purposes of section 7 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The alleged benefit was also not shown to be capable of valuation in the manner required by section 40, so the charging provision could not apply. The estate duty addition on the Bangalore house was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Jul 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36066