1982 (7) TMI 186

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was a mortgage debt charge on this property amounting to Rs. 75,000. The Asst. Controller deducted a sum of Rs. 1 lakh from the value of this asset being the exemption available u/s 33(1)(n) and out of the balance of Rs. 1 lakh allowed only proportionate amount of the mortgage debt of Rs. 37,500. On appeal, the Appellate Controller directed the deduction of the mortgage debt first from the value of the asset and granted exemption u/s 33(1)(n) out of the balance, i.e., the liability of Rs. 75,000 was deducted out of the value of the asset determined at Rs. 2 lakhs and from the net value of the asset of Rs. 1,25,000 exemption of Rs. 1 lakh was given u/s 33(1)(n). 3. The revenue has taken exception to this decision of the Appellate Controlle....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ning the value of the estate, this provision is a restriction confining the deduction of certain debts from the value of a particular asset which is charged with that debt. It would follow that what is to be taken as the value of the asset is the net value which is chargeable to estate duty and from the net value the deductions u/s 33 in respect of exemptions have to be given. 4. Even assuming for the purpose of discussion that the proviso allows the deduction of the debt in respect of the value of the property liable to estate duty only, the contention of the revenue that the deduction should be proportionately reduced to the value liable to estate duty does not follow. In contrast to the Wealth-tax Act where u/s 5(1) the asset exempted f....