1986 (2) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Controller under section 62 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ? If the answer to question No. 1 be in the affirmative then: 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the appeal filed by Shyamal Bikash Sett before the Appellate Controller without its being accompanied by certified copy of the assessment order or the demand notice, was proper ? " One Sushil Kumar Sett died on September 20, 1964. An assessment under the Estate Duty Act was made on March 31, 1969. This was pursuant to a statement of account of the estate filed by one Swarup Bikash Sett, the eldest son of the deceased. Shyamal Bikash Sett, the youngest son of Sushil and a step-brother of Swarup, filed an applicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bunal, however, held him to be a person who as a son of the deceased was entitled to be deemed as an accountable person under section 53 of the Act and as such Shyamal was also entitled to impugn the assessment. The Tribunal, however, did not think it necessary to decide the question as to whether the assessment was proper and legal, since it would be a matter to be decided in all finality by the Appellate Controller, once the appeal was held to be competent. The further contention of the Revenue was that even if an appeal of Shyamal was entertainable, as one filed by a competent person, still the appeal was not properly filed before the Appellate Controller. The Tribunal found it evident from the letter dated October 13, 1969, that Shya....