TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (1) TMI 90
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ill be better to dispose of all the three matters by this common judgment. The question which is referred in each of these three matters is: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the appeal of the accountable person made against the order of rectification was competent under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 62 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 ?" The facts giving rise to reference No. 8 of 1978 which may be stated for the sake of illustration are that one Jayantilal Keshavlal Mehta died on October 15, 1970. Assessment of estate duty payable on the passing of the property on his death was completed by the Assistant Controller on April 14, 1972, and the prin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and Pressing Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1973] 90 ITR 332 on the ground that the decision of the High Court in Mandal Ginning Co.'s case was in the context of the provisions of s. 30, sub-s. (1), of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922, where the relevant words were "any assessee ... denying his liability to be assessed under this Act ", whereas, under s. 62(1)(b), the relevant words are "any person ... denying his liability to the amount of estate duty payable in respect of any property". In view of this difference in language, the Tribunal distinguished the decision in Mandal Ginning Co.'s case [1973] 90 ITR 332 (Guj) and held that the appeal was maintainable under s. 62(1)(b) of the E.D. Act. Thereafter, at the instance of the revenue, the question here inab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessed under this Act', the word 'assessed' is used in a comprehensive sense to mean subjected to the whole procedure for ascertaining and imposing liability on the taxpayer. There is nothing in section 30(1) to indicate that a narrow meaning should be given to the word 'assessed'. On the contrary, the words 'under this Act' clearly show that the reference here is to the whole procedure laid down in the Act for imposing liability on the taxpayer. The denial of liability to be assessed may be in respect of the whole income or any part of the income. It may be based on any ground, whether of fact or law, and it may be total denial of liability or denial of liability under particular circumstances. But the denial must be of the liability to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the language of s. 62(1)(b) cannot be cut down in any manner as is sought to be done by the revenue. The Gujarat High Court in Mandal Ginning Co.'s case [1973] 90 ITR 332 decided the appealability against an order of rectification on the interpretation of the word "assessed" occurring in s. 30, sub-s. (1), of the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. There are no such words to be found in s. 62(1)(b) of the E.D. Act and the Tribunal was, therefore, right in coming to the conclusion that the decision in Mandal Ginning Co.'s case [1973] 90 ITR 332 (Guj) cannot apply to the interpretation of s. 62(1)(b) of the E.D. Act. We may incidentally point out that in CED v. P. E. Venkitraman [1978] 115 ITR 222, the Kerala High Court has also taken the same view....