2004 (2) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was not of a jurisdictional High Court and not binding to him?" Upon the death of Kalyanji Bachulal, his wife Smt. Hemkunverben Kalyanji, offered for estate duty one half share of the deceased in the Hindu undivided family consisting of the deceased and his wife, i.e., the accountable person. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty in his original assessment dated October 15, 1977, held that half of the estate passed on the death of Kalyanji. Thereafter, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty issued notice dated September 14, 1978, for reopening the assessment on the ground that the deceased was the sole surviving coparcener and, therefore, had the power to dispose of the property as if it was his separate property and that the wife co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iving coparcener and he had the full disposing capacity, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty was justified in reopening the assessment as the entire property in the Hindu undivided family passed on the death of the deceased to his widow. Mr. Desai has been fair enough to invite our attention to the decision of the apex court in Smt. Nita Taneja v. Asst. CED [1995] 211 ITR 462. It appears to us that the facts in the case before the apex court were very much similar to the facts in the present case except that in the case before the Supreme Court the power of rectification was invoked and not the power of reopening the assessment as such. The court dealt with the case both on the question of justification for invoking the power of r....