CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Vs. BABUBHAI T PANCHAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this case, at the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to us for our opinion :

(2.) THE facts are that the deceased in this case was one Trikamlal P. Panchal who died on 3rd March, 1964. The deceased, Trikamlal, was a member of an HUF consisting of himself, his wife and his son. The HUF owned both movable and immovable properties. The deceased executed a deed of release on 29th Jan., 1964, and by this deed he released his interest in the movable property only out of the total property belonging to the HUF. Hereleased this interest in movable property in favour of other members of the HUF without any consideration whatsoever. In the document he made it clear that he had not released his interest so far as the immovable properties of the joint family were concerned. In the recitals, he made it clear that he was desirous of releasing his rights, title and interest and all other interest in the movable property of the said joint family including the business of B. Trikamlal & Company and goodwill thereof and the persons in whose favour the interest was being released were to keep all movable properties and the said business subject to the payment of debts and liabilities of the said joint family including that of the business. In the operative part, the document mentioned :

(3.) ON appeal by the accountable person, the Appellate CED confirmed the order of the Asstt. CED. The matter was carried in further appeal by the accountable person to the Tribunal and the Tribunal held that there was no partition and since it could not be predicated of the right of a Hindu coparcener as to what his share in the joint family property would be, Expln. 2 to S. 2(15) of the Act was not attracted. The Tribunal, therefore, deleted the inclusion of Rs. 72,668 as one third share of the deceased in the movable property of the HUF. Thereafter, at the instance of the revenue, the question hereinabove set out has been referred to us for our opinion : Before proceeding further with the discussion of facts and authorities, we would refer to some of the relevant provisions of the ED Act, 1953. Under Sub S. (15) of S. 2, "property" has been defined to include any interest in property, movable or immovable, the proceeds of sale thereof and any money or investment for the time being representing the proceeds of sale and also includes any property converted from one species into another by any method. Explanation 2 to Sub S. (15) of s. 2 is material for the purposes of this judgment and is in these words :