NITA TANEJA Vs. ASSTT CONTROLLER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Patna High court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The matter arises under the Estate Duty Act.

(3.) One B. P. Taneja died on 29/3/1970. His wife, the appellant herein, filed a return as an accountable person stating that only half the estate held by the deceased passed to her inasmuch as she was entitled to the other half. The return filed by her was accepted by the authority with certain modifications. Later, on 26/10/1977, the Assistant Controller issued a notice under Section 61 of the Estate Duty Act proposing to rectify the assessment order. According to this notice, on the death of the deceased, the entire estate passed and not merely half of it. The appellant filed objections contending, inter alia, that the mistake, if any, was not a mistake apparent from the record warranting invocation of the power of rectification under Section 61 of the Estate Duty Act. The Assistant Controller overruled the objections by his order dated 8/9/1977. In this order, the Assistant Controller did not specifically deal with the objections raised by the appellant that since there was no mistake apparent from the record, power of rectification could not be exercised. The appellant questioned the order of the assistant Controller by way of a writ petition filed in the High court. The High court dealt with other points raised by the appellant but refused to deal with the submission that power of rectification was not available (inasmuch as there was no error from the record) on the ground that the said issue was not dealt with by the Assistant Controller. The said order is questioned in this appeal.