TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (10) TMI 56
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunal was legally correct in holding that the best judgment assessment under section 58(4) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953, was invalid ? " The dispute concerns the estate of Smt. Asarfi Devi, who died on the 23rd September, 1959. The accountable person did not file an account of the estate within the six months period granted under s. 53(3) of the Act. On the 18th of February, 1963, the Asst. CED issued a notice under s. 55 of the Act, which was served on the accountable person on the 5th of March, 1963, calling upon him to deliver the account of the estate of late Smt. Asarfi Devi. In response to this notice, Smt. Manorama Devi filed a return in Form ED-5 on April 1, 1963, and also took up the stand that the notice and the proceedings were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the deceased,-- (a) every legal representative to whom such property so passes for any beneficial interest in possession or in whom any interest in the property so passing is at any time vested, (b) every trustee, guardian, committee or other person to whom any interest in the property so passing or the management thereof is at any time vested, and (c) every person in whom any interest in the property so passing is vested in possession by alienation or other derivative title, shall be accountable for the whole of the estate duty on the property passing on the death but shall not be liable for any duty in excess of the assets of the deceased which he actually received or which, but for his own neglect or default, he might have receiv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... payable as estate duty. (4) In any case where no account has been delivered as required by section 53 or section 56, or the person accountable fails to comply with the terms of the notice served under sub-section (2), the Controller shall make the assessment to the best of his judgment and determine the amount payable as estate duty. " Section 53(3) requires every person accountable for estate duty to file an account in the prescribed form, and verified in the prescribed manner within six months of the death of the deceased. The proviso gives power to the Controller to extend the period of six months fixed for filing the accounts. In the present case, the accountable persons had not filed the return within the period of six months, but t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h the account of the deceased are filed. So far as s. 55 is concerned that is only an empowering provision, as all that it does is to authorise the Controller to call upon the persons mentioned in that provision to deliver a statement of particulars as mentioned in that provision and where the accountable person has received notice under s. 55, and in compliance thereof he files a return, the return would be one which would be under s, 53(1), for, section 56 applies only to cases where letters for representation are sought by the executors of the deceased. The fact that such an account is filed six months after the death of the deceased does not mean that it is not an account of the estate of the deceased as contemplated by s. 53(1). In our....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and they did not comply with the terms thereof. This being so, a best judgment assessment could be made under s. 58(4). This view obviates the necessity of considering the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of CIT v. Ranchhoddas Karsondas [1959] 36 ITR 569 and the State of Assam v. D. C. Choudhuri [1970] 76 ITR 706. For, once it is held that the return filed by the accountable persons was a return under s. 53(1), the case would not be one where no account had been delivered so as to make it necessary to examine the provisions of the first part of s. 58(4) and s. 59. It may be mentioned that in Choudhuri's case [1970] 76 ITR 706, the Supreme Court struck down the proceedings on the ground that no notice under s. 19(2) of the Assam A....