A. KANDASWAMI PILLAI (REPRESENTED BY HEIR) AND ANOTHER vs CONTROLLER — 1972 PTD 644

Citation: 1972 PTD 644

Court: Madras High Court

Year: 1971

Decision Date: 1971-12-31

Parties: A. KANDASWAMI PILLAI (REPRESENTED BY HEIR) AND ANOTHER vs CONTROLLER JUDGMENT

Headnotes

Case cited as 1972 PTD 644

Judgment Text

Court Name: Madras High Court Judge(s): A. Alagiriswa mi, K. Veeraswa mi Title:A. KANDASWAMI PILLAI (REPRESENTED BY HEIR) AND ANOTHER vs CONTROLLER JUDGMENT Reported As: 1972 PTD 644 Result: N/A Judgment JUDGMENT VEERASWAMI, J.-These two references have been hear( together, because they turn on the interpretation of section 46(1) of the Estate Duty Act and its application to the facts in each, In the first of the references, the questions are "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the liability of Rs. 5,548 claimed as a deduction from the value of the properties of the Hindu undivided family in which the deceased had one-third share, were rightly disallowed under section 46(1)(a) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 7 (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, in computing the value of the properties of the Hindu undivided family, a sum of Rs. 11,510 was rightly added tinder section 46(2) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953?" On January 21, 1959, A. Arunachalam Pillai died. He was one of the members of a Hindu undivided family, the others being his two brothers. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Coimbatore, valued the properties of the family at Rs. 14,30,822 and the one-third share of the deceased at Rs. 4,75,941, for purposes of levy of estate duty. The estate duty payable was assessed at Rs. 49,983.1. Several years prior to the death of Arunachalam Pillai, the family had made a gift of certain agricultural lands to three female…

Read the full judgment on Al Wakeelo — Pakistan's AI-powered legal research platform.