TMI Blog1983 (2) TMI 48X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,78,485 made u/s. 9(1) read with section 27(l) of the Estate Duty Act ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the action of the deceased in not taking any share of the goodwill on his retirement from the firm, M/s. Shadi Ram Ganga Prasad, on June 27,1968, resulting in 'deemed gift' u/s. 9(1) read with section 27, Explanation 2, to section 2(15) of the Act ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the estate duty levied under section 5(2) of the Act, is deductible in ascertaining the ' principal ' amount for the purpose of this section ? " One Ganga Prasad Kanudia expired on July 1, 1968. The dispute in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the entire value of the estate of the deceased thereunder, the value of the estate left by the deceased, for the purpose of the Act, was to be treated to be Rs. 3,53,485 on the basis that the value of the property of the HUF in its entirety was Rs. 10,60,456. The remaining amount of Rs 1,78,485 was, therefore, added to the estate of the deceased which, according to the Controller, was deemed to pass at the time of his death. This view was affirmed in appeal, but in second appeal before the Income-tax Tribunal, the view taken by the Tribunal was that sum of Rs. 1,78,485 bad to be excluded while computing the value of the estate of the deceased. This was on the ground that partial partition of property was involved in such a transaction, and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the accountable person and in favour of the Controller. The second and third questions were referred by the Tribunal at the instance of the accountable person. The notice of this reference was duly served upon the accountable persons and at one stage they were represented in this court by Sri Raja Ram Agarwal, advocate. On October 31, 1980, Sri Raja Ram Agarwal stated before a Bench of this court that he had no instructions to appear on behalf of the accountable persons. No one else has put in appearance on behalf of the accountable persons. Even before this Bench, which has heard the reference, no one has appeared on behalf of the accountable persons with the request to answer the questions referred at the instance of the accoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
