<?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>1991 (5) TMI 89 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55927</link>
    <description>Movable property situated outside India was excluded from the principal value of an estate unless the deceased was domiciled in India at death. Domicile under the Estate Duty Act had to be determined by the Indian Succession Act, which recognises a domicile of origin, acquisition of a domicile of choice by fixed habitation abroad, and resumption of Indian domicile only through the prescribed act after the required residence. Long residence and conduct in Kenya and the United Kingdom, British citizenship, passport declarations, and repeated stays outside India showed a domicile of choice abroad and no effective return to Indian domicile. Citizenship, residence, and ownership of property in India were held insufficient to prove Indian domicile; the foreign movable property was therefore not includible in the estate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2010 16:53:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=94389" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (5) TMI 89 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-B</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55927</link>
      <description>Movable property situated outside India was excluded from the principal value of an estate unless the deceased was domiciled in India at death. Domicile under the Estate Duty Act had to be determined by the Indian Succession Act, which recognises a domicile of origin, acquisition of a domicile of choice by fixed habitation abroad, and resumption of Indian domicile only through the prescribed act after the required residence. Long residence and conduct in Kenya and the United Kingdom, British citizenship, passport declarations, and repeated stays outside India showed a domicile of choice abroad and no effective return to Indian domicile. Citizenship, residence, and ownership of property in India were held insufficient to prove Indian domicile; the foreign movable property was therefore not includible in the estate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 May 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>