https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40181 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 requires aggregation of the deceased's coparcenary interest with the interests of lineal descendants for rate purposes, and this classification was treated as rational under article 14. The provision operates within the Act's charging and valuation scheme and does not offend equality merely because property actually passing and property deemed to pass are aggregated for computation. Mitakshara, Marumakkattayam and Aliyasantana joint family interests were recognised as a distinct class, and wider legislative discretion was accepted in taxing statutes so long as the classification is not arbitrary or obviously unequal. The provision was therefore upheld as constitutionally valid. en-us Thu, 17 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 12 Jul 2014 12:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40181 Section 34(1)(c) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 requires aggregation of the deceased's coparcenary interest with the interests of lineal descendants for rate purposes, and this classification was treated as rational under article 14. The provision operates within the Act's charging and valuation scheme and does not offend equality merely because property actually passing and property deemed to pass are aggregated for computation. Mitakshara, Marumakkattayam and Aliyasantana joint family interests were recognised as a distinct class, and wider legislative discretion was accepted in taxing statutes so long as the classification is not arbitrary or obviously unequal. The provision was therefore upheld as constitutionally valid. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 17 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40181