<?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 (6) TMI 44 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38044</link>
    <description>For estate duty purposes, annuity deposits passing on death were treated as property in the estate, valued as at the date of death without reduction for the heirs&#039; future income-tax liability. Estate duty itself was not deductible in computing the principal value because it was not an encumbrance created by the deceased. Life insurance proceeds assigned only as security remained includible to the extent of the net amount after the outstanding loan. For house property, the deceased&#039;s actual purchase price was accepted as the best evidence of market value, with rent capitalisation treated as secondary. The valuation and inclusion made by the estate duty authorities were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Dec 2024 07:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=76590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (6) TMI 44 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38044</link>
      <description>For estate duty purposes, annuity deposits passing on death were treated as property in the estate, valued as at the date of death without reduction for the heirs&#039; future income-tax liability. Estate duty itself was not deductible in computing the principal value because it was not an encumbrance created by the deceased. Life insurance proceeds assigned only as security remained includible to the extent of the net amount after the outstanding loan. For house property, the deceased&#039;s actual purchase price was accepted as the best evidence of market value, with rent capitalisation treated as secondary. The valuation and inclusion made by the estate duty authorities were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jun 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>