GUNVANTLAL KESHAVLAL Vs. CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Income tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") has, at the instance of the accountable person, referred the following two questions to us for our opinion under S. 64(1) of the ED Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"):

(2.) OUT of these two questions one question, namely, question No. 2, is directly covered by a decision of this Court in Smt. Shantaben Narottamdas vs. CED (1978) 111 ITR 365(Guj). Following the said decision, this question, namely, question No. 2 shall have to be answered in the affirmative and against the accountable person.

(3.) THE deceased was a member of an HUF (hereafter referred to as "the HUF"). The HUF owned a house valued at Rs. 80,000 which was used for residence by the members of the HUF. According to the accountable person as the value of the house used for residence was less than rupees one lakh it was not includible in the dutiable estate under S. 33(1)(n) of the Act.