KRISHNAN G Vs. CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY ASST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner's father, one Govinda Menon died on October 18, 1981, leaving behind immovable properties of a value which made the estate liable for payment of duty under the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (the Act). THE Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Earnakulam, completed the assessment of the petitioner on July 29, 1983, determining the principle value of the estate liable for duty at Rs. 6,40,580. Demand was made for Rs. 82,174 as the balance of estate duty payable after crediting the provisional duty of Rs. 25,000 paid by the petitioner. THE petitioner paid a further sum of Rs. 10,272 and sought the facility of paying the balance amount in instalments under Section 70(2) of the Act, which was allowed by the proceedings, exhibit P-1, and the petitioner was permitted to pay the amount in eight half-yearly instalments from February 6, 1984, inclusive of interest. THE petitioner simultaneously challenged the assessment in appeal which was partly allowed by the Appellate Controller on November 23, 1984, reducing the principal value by Rs. 1,85,000. THE order was implemented by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty by Ms proceedings, exhibit P-2, dated January 5, 1985, fixing the duty payable at Rs. 53,845. Deducting the amounts already paid provisionally and in instalments, demand was made for a further amount of Rs. 445 which was paid by the petitioner on February 22, 1985. By this payment no further amounts remained to be paid by way of estate duty under the assessment as modified in appeal.

(2.) THE Revenue challenged the appellate order in appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. THE appeal was successful in part and the principal value became Rs. 5,68,580 and the estate duty payable thereon Rs. 85,574. THE order of the Tribunal is dated September 29, 1989. THE balance duty payable was Rs. 32,328 for which demand was made along with an amount of Rs. 8,848 by way of interest under Section 70 (vide exhibit P-3 dated December 6, 1989). THE petitioner paid the balance amount of duty and sought waiver of the interest demanded by his petition, exhibit P-5. THE request was, however, rejected by the Assistant Controller by his proceedings, exhibit P-6, dated July 17, 1990, on the ground that the petitioner had opted for payment of the duty in instalments and, therefore, interest was payable under Section 70 of the Act. THE petitioner's subsequent request to the Commissioner of Income-tax did not meet with any success, being rejected by the proceedings, exhibit P-8.

(3.) THE original petition is, therefore, allowed in part. I direct the first respondent to modify the order, exhibit P-3, in so far as it claims interest from the petitioner, by deleting that part of the interest which relates to the period when the Appellate Controller's order was in force, upto September 29, 1989, and confining it only to the rest of the period.