<?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>1978 (2) TMI 12 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36614</link>
    <description>An administratrix pendente lite appointed during pending probate litigation is not an &quot;administrator&quot; administering the estate within the Explanation to section 168 of the Income-tax Act, because her role is limited to preserving the estate under court control and not distributing it. The estate income therefore cannot be assessed on that footing. The mere pendency of a challenge to the will also does not make the heirs&#039; shares indeterminate where the shares remain capable of ascertainment under the will or, if necessary, intestate succession. Assessment as an association of persons under sections 161 and 164 was not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:47:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=75160" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (2) TMI 12 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36614</link>
      <description>An administratrix pendente lite appointed during pending probate litigation is not an &quot;administrator&quot; administering the estate within the Explanation to section 168 of the Income-tax Act, because her role is limited to preserving the estate under court control and not distributing it. The estate income therefore cannot be assessed on that footing. The mere pendency of a challenge to the will also does not make the heirs&#039; shares indeterminate where the shares remain capable of ascertainment under the will or, if necessary, intestate succession. Assessment as an association of persons under sections 161 and 164 was not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>