<?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>1975 (4) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39309</link>
    <description>Gifted property is includible in the principal value of an estate under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 unless the donee immediately assumes and thereafter retains bona fide possession and enjoyment to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. The controlling test is whether the donor was in fact fully excluded from the gifted property; if not, the gift remains chargeable even if the non-exclusion is not shown to benefit the donor. On the stated facts, the donor continued to manage the lands, the income was credited to his accounts, no interest was paid to the donees, and the funds were used in his business, showing no exclusive enjoyment by the donees.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:02:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=77855" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1975 (4) TMI 24 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39309</link>
      <description>Gifted property is includible in the principal value of an estate under section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 unless the donee immediately assumes and thereafter retains bona fide possession and enjoyment to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. The controlling test is whether the donor was in fact fully excluded from the gifted property; if not, the gift remains chargeable even if the non-exclusion is not shown to benefit the donor. On the stated facts, the donor continued to manage the lands, the income was credited to his accounts, no interest was paid to the donees, and the funds were used in his business, showing no exclusive enjoyment by the donees.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 1975 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39309</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>