1982 (2) TMI 166

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he value of the estate at Rs. 91,999. The contention before the Appellate Controller was that the notice under section 55 was issued beyond the time limit specified in section 73A(a) of the Act and as such was invalid. The Appellate Controller rejected the plea of the revenue that the return was filed voluntarily by the accountable person and as such section 73A(a) did not apply. He gave a clear finding that the return was in response to the notice issued on 16-8-1974. In effect the Appellate Controller held that the Assistant Controller commenced the proceedings for levy of estate duty after the expiry of five years from the date of death and as such the assessment was time barred. The revenue is in appeal. 2. The learned departmental rep....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... delivered. He submitted that the observations of the High Court are not quite appropriate since a person requiring grant of representation, etc., may submit the estate duty return at any time he pleases and the Assistant Controller can make an assessment and furnish a certificate to the applicant for grant of representation. In such a case the provisions of section 73A will not be applicable at all. On the above grounds, it was urged that the Appellate Controller's order should be set aside. 2.1 The learned counsel for the accountable person, on the other hand, submitted that it is not possible to infer that a voluntary return has been filed in this case. The return was prompted by the notice issued by the Assistant Controller. Although t....