9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (9) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons that the deceased was a member of a joint family at the time of his death and, therefore, his 1/6th share alone in the joint family passed on his death, proceeded to determine the principal value of the 1/6th share of the deceased in the joint family at Rs. 5,27,069 by his order dated 29th November, 1971. As regards the valuation of some of the items of the properties, the accountable persons filed an appeal before the Controller. The Controller partly allowed the appeal. As against the order of the Controller, both the Revenue as well as the accountable persons filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the accountable persons but dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. Aggrieved by the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oners' request for stay of collection of estate duty, the demand for payment of estate duty has to be enforced. It is under those circumstances, the petitioners have come before this court seeking to quash the order of the Asst. Controller, dated June 18, 1977, refusing to grant stay of the collection of the estate duty. The Asst. Controller, who also comes within the definition of the "Controller " in s. 2(5), has the power u/s. 70 to postpone the collection of the estate duty for such period or to such extent and on such terms as lie may think fit, if he is satisfied that the estate duty leviable in respect of any property cannot, without excessive sacrifice, be raised at once. The Asst. Controller has also the discretion u/s. 73(4) to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case. Sub-section (6) of 220 gave a further discretion to the ITO to treat the assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount disputed in the appeal. In that case the ITO refused to stay the collection of the tax. It is at that stage the assessee came before this court questioning the order of the ITO to stay the collection of the tax. This court pointed out that the power granted to the officer u/s. 220(6) is one coupled with a duty to exercise it and, therefore, he has to exercise his discretion according to law and reason and without acting arbitrarily or capriciously or without taking into account any irrelevant or extraneous matters not germane to the exercise of his discretion. While s. 220(6) deals with the amount of arre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
