TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its deduction. - We are, therefore, of the view that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the sum of Rs. 4,71,589 which represented the loan advanced by the executor of the estate of the deceased before distribution of the assets was an admissible deduction, even though the executor of the estate happened to be the sole legal heir of the deceased - - - - - Dated:- 5-9-2005 - Judge(s) : S. K. KULSHRESTHA., ASHOK KUMAR TIWARI. JUDGMENT The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, has referred the following question under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act 1957 for opinion of this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Wealth-tax Act and, therefore, a person actually administering the estate, was required to be treated as an executor, even if no will was executed and the deceased had died intestate. The Department resisted the claim of the assessee. It was emphasized that the assessee being the sole legal heir of the deceased had inherited the entire estate and it would be wrong to hold that she had advanced loan to the estate. It was also contended that payment of tax in respect of the estate of the deceased was the personal liability of the assessee and in case the assessee's contention is accepted, it would tantamount to the advancement of loan to her own self. The Tribunal, however, came to the conclusion that the contention advanced on beh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealth of the assessee have been decided by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, in which the matter with regard to the amount for which the deduction was being claimed, has also been decided and the Department has not preferred any appeal, the Department is estopped from raising the same issue. It seems that in the proceedings before the Tribunal at Ahmedabad, this amount was excluded and thereafter the deduction was claimed in the present proceedings. It, therefore, does not appear that this amount has been taxed in the hands of the assessee in relation to her wealth as an individual. There is nothing before us to impel us to come to the conclusion that the Department is trying to tax the amount twice. Coming to the merits of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary legatee might be interested in the estate subject to the payment of debts and legacies, but he did not become the proprietor or owner of the residue except when a residue had been ascertained which on completion of administration, is made over to him by the executors. The question in each case is, has the administration reached a point at which you can infer that the administration has been completed, the residuary estate has been ascertained, the bequest of the residue has been assessed to and the residuary estate, therefore, became vested in trustees, be they the executors themselves or strangers?" We may add that this decision has been relied upon by both the parties. From the above decision it is manifest that the question of ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
