<?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>1973 (6) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39876</link>
    <description>Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 turns on whether the gifted property was immediately assumed and thereafter retained by the donee to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. Outright cash gifts later deposited by the donees with the donor&#039;s firm were treated as remaining within the mischief of the section, because the donor acquired possession and enjoyment through the firm after the gift. The provision was also construed as applying to the relevant part of the gifted property that fails the exclusion test, rather than only to a notional donor&#039;s interest. A proviso-based argument on withdrawals more than two years before death succeeded only to the limited extent found on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 17:44:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=78422" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1973 (6) TMI 26 - GUJARAT High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39876</link>
      <description>Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 turns on whether the gifted property was immediately assumed and thereafter retained by the donee to the donor&#039;s entire exclusion. Outright cash gifts later deposited by the donees with the donor&#039;s firm were treated as remaining within the mischief of the section, because the donor acquired possession and enjoyment through the firm after the gift. The provision was also construed as applying to the relevant part of the gifted property that fails the exclusion test, rather than only to a notional donor&#039;s interest. A proviso-based argument on withdrawals more than two years before death succeeded only to the limited extent found on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 1973 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39876</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>