TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (9) TMI 130
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h she was a member and, as such, her interest in the coparcenary property is not includible under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (' the Act '), after passing of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. 3. The parties have been heard at length. Before we come to the legal aspects of the issue, it would be necessary to bring into focus factual background of the case which is as under. The husband of late Smt. Tamkori Devi died long ago prior to coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act. After the death of her husband, the family consisted of Smt. Tamkori Devi widow, her son, Shambhuprashad, and three unmarried daughters. Smt. Tamkori Devi died on 3-11-1976 leaving behind her son, Shri Shambhuprashad, who is the accountable person for the purpose of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the accountable person that after the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, the coparcenary interest of the deceased was not chargeable to estate duty because the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CED v. Alladi Kuppuswami [1977] 108 ITR 439 was not applicable to the facts of this case. Hence, the grievance of the revenue before us. 6. In the case of Alladi Kuppuswami, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a Hindu widow succeeding to the interest of her husband in a Hindu coparcenary by virtue of section 3(2) and (3) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937, undoubtedly, possessed a coparcenary interest as contemplated by section 7(1) of the 1953 Act. Although she cannot be a coparcener, yet she is a member ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14-11-1959, leaving behind her, two sons and one unmarried daughter who along with her constituted a joint Hindu family as stated above. Smt. Subhadra had not claimed the partition of joint family properties before her death nor there was any partition effected amongst the said members. 8. On the above facts, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held that the widow, who acquired the interest of her deceased husband under section 3(2), and who was possessed of the said interest on the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, became the absolute owner of that estate by operation of law under section 14 of the said Act and, thus, she would have all the rights of a full owner to possess, manage, and enjoy exclusively and of disposal either b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ased husband under section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, and who was possessed of the said interest on coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act became the absolute owner of estate by operation of section 14. Thus, she would have all the rights of a full owner and would be competent to dispose it of which is an incident of full ownership. Therefore, her interest would be deemed to be property passing on her death under section 5 or section 6 of the Act. The right which has been given to Hindu women under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act is also in lieu of partition. Therefore, if a notional partition were to take place shortly before VP's death, she would not be allowed to share twice over, namely, one under ....