1973 (3) TMI 56

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egative and in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by that decision the department has come up in appeal to this court. The facts of the case as can be gathered from the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal are as follows: "The deceased, Sri N. S. Ranmaswami Iyer, was a partner in the the firm of Messrs. Ennessor and Company. The other partners of the firm consisted of the three sons and the daughter of the deceased. The firm was engaged in money-lending and financing business. The firm was registered under section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. At the end of the accounting year 1952-53, the current account of the deceased showed a credit balance of Rs. 78,098-6-5. On March 31, 1953, the deceased transferred by adjus....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ich he was a partner, the deceased continued to enjoy the benefit of this capital. (iv) Section 10 of the Estate Duty Act was applicable. The accountable persons preferred an appeal before the Appellate Controller against the order of the Assistant Controller including the sum of Rs. 1,29,924 in the value of the estate of the deceased. They contended that it cannot be said that the donees, who were partners in the firm, were not having exclusive possession and beneficial enjoyment of their share in the assets of the partnership merely because the deceased was participating in the management of the business of the partnership. It was, therefore, contended that section 10 of the Estate Duty Act was inapplicable. The Appellate Controller....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e amounts gifted or from the benefits therefrom. The department relied upon the decision in the case of Clifford Jolin Chick v. Commissioner of Stamp Duties [1959] 37 I.T.R. (E. D.). The attention of the Tribunal was also drawn to the decision in the case of Rash Mohan Chatterjee v. Controlled of Estate Duty [1964] 52 I.T.R. (E. D.) 1 (Cal.) in which the distinguishing feature between Chick's case and Munro's case was pointed out, viz., that whereas in Munro's case the subject-matter of the gift was property shorn of the rights of the pre-existing partnership of Munro and his sons, in Chick's case there was an initial outright gift of the property without its having shorn of any rights. The Tribunal was of the view t....