https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40155 A unilateral blending of a coparcener's separate property with joint family property is not a "disposition" within the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The Court applied the statutory deeming scheme and held that blending does not operate as a bilateral transfer, does not create fresh enforceable rights in other coparceners, and does not amount to an extinguishment of rights in the statutory sense. The earlier reasoning in Rajamani Ammal was treated as sound, while Kantilal Trikamlal was distinguished as concerned with unequal partition, not blending. Accordingly, the property could not be treated as a gift or included in the estate on that basis. en-us Fri, 01 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40155 A unilateral blending of a coparcener's separate property with joint family property is not a "disposition" within the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The Court applied the statutory deeming scheme and held that blending does not operate as a bilateral transfer, does not create fresh enforceable rights in other coparceners, and does not amount to an extinguishment of rights in the statutory sense. The earlier reasoning in Rajamani Ammal was treated as sound, while Kantilal Trikamlal was distinguished as concerned with unequal partition, not blending. Accordingly, the property could not be treated as a gift or included in the estate on that basis. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 01 Nov 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40155