CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Vs. RAMACHANDRA BHAT N

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE cases arise out of the estate duty proceedings consequent upon the death of one N. Govinda Bhat who died on 15th Feb., 1972. N. Govinda Bhat was governed by the Madras School of Mitakshara. He died leaving him, his widow and two sons. Before his death he was the manager of a joint Hindu family, consisting of himself and his two sons. In these proceedings we are concerned with the coparcenary interest passing on his death. Before the Asstt. CED, it was contended by the accountable person that only 1/4th interest in the joint family property passed on the death of Govinda Bhat on the basis that the wife of Govinda Bhat also had a share in the joint family property. The Asst. CED rejected the said contention. The ACED also rejected it in the appeal filed by the accountable person. Aggrieved by the order of the ACED, the accountable person filed an appeal before the Tribunal, Bangalore Bench. In that appeal, in addition to the contention referred to above, he raised a further contention that by virtue of S. 33(1)(n) of the Act, the value of the interest of the lineal descendants in the residential house in which the deceased was living, was also not liable to be included for the purpose of rate under S. 34(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the entire value of the residential house had to be excluded from consideration both under s. 34(1)(a) and under S. 34(1)(c), in view of S. 33(1)(n) of the Act. But the contention of the accountable person that the wife had also a share in the joint family property during the lifetime of Govinda Bhat was rejected. Thereupon, at the instance of the Department, the following question of law has been referred to us under S. 64(1) of the Act :

(2.) IN CED vs. K. Nataraja (TRC No. 6 of 1973 decided on 19th July, 1978), since reported in (1979) 119 ITR 769 (Kar), we have held while answering a question similar to the first question in the following way :