CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Vs. DALESHWARI DEVI SMT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question referred to this court reads as follows :

(2.) THE husband of the accountable person died on April 12, 1977. An order of assessment was passed initially by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, which was set aside on appeal by the Controller on January 10, 1980. THE matter was remanded to the Assistant Controller for fresh assessment. Three questions were directed to be considered. We are concerned only with one question, which was "whether half of the estate passed as contended by the appellant after the death of the deceased, the late Dewan Pritam Singh".

(3.) WE are entirely in agreement with the reasoning of the Tribunal that there was no fresh information to the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, on the basis of which the assessment could have been reopened. Mr. Inder Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, placed reliance on a judgment of the Kerala High Court in Aspinwall and Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (No. 1) [1996] 220 ITR 611. A Division Bench of that court held that if the Income-tax Officer determines the effect and consequence of the law mentioned in the audit and tries to streamline the position in the light thereof, for curing the situation of escaped assessment, it would amount to information because the basis of the belief would be the position of law in regard to which the officer became aware. The Bench referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Indian and Eastern Newspaper Society v. CIT, 1979 119 ITR 996, and observed that (page 614) : "having gone through the said decision as to what amounts to 'information' declaring that if the Income-tax Officer determines as to what is the effect and consequence of the law mentioned in the audit and tries to streamline the position in the light thereof, for curing the situation of escaped assessment, it would amount to information because the basis of the belief would be the position of law in regard to which the officer became aware".