CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Vs. JYOTIRMOY RAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This reference arises out of the assessment to estate duty of the estate of one Bidhumukhi Raha, who died on the 21st November, 1970. Under his last will and testament, Sarat Kumar Raha, the late husband of the deceased, had bequeathed to the deceased one small house in Calcutta absolutely as also another property being premises No. 5, Lovelock Place, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the "said premises"), providing further, that on the death of the deceased the said two premises would devolve on her two sons in equal shares.

(2.) The small house and the first floor of the said premises had at all material times been let out. Till her death the deceased resided in the ground floor of the said premises.

(3.) On the death of the deceased her son, Jyotirmoy Raha, an accountable person, filed a return of estate duty and claimed exemption in respect of the portion of the said premises used by the deceased for her residence under Section 33(1)(n) of the Estate Duty Act, 1953. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty rejected the claim for exemption on the ground that the said Section 33(1)(n) did not apply as the said premises, in which the deceased only had a life interest and consequently only a right of possession and enjoyment, could not be said to be property belonging to the deceased. He included the entire value of the said premises in computing the value of the estate.