P.S. Dhillon, Judicial Member - (1.) THE Revenue has made this appeal against the order dated 24-6-1983 of Shri K.S. Rao, Controller of Estate Duty (Appeals)-VIII, Ahmedabad who allowed the appeal (statistical purpose) against the order dated 25-2-1982 of Shri R.B. Bhatt, Asstt. Controller of Estate Duty, Ahmedabad.
(2.) The relevant facts, in brief, are that the deceased Harigangaben K. Nagori died on 19-2-1977, who was the widow, being her husband died on 20-2-1971. The family of the deceased consisted of her husband, two sons and a daughter in the year 1971 and prior to the date 20-2-1971 on which day her husband died. Her husband before his death made a will dated 21-4-1969 vide which he devolved his interest in the HUF property which was to devolve on the HUF itself, for his two sons and his wife, In view of these facts, it was claimed and contended before the Asstt. Controller of Estate Duty that the deceased (widow) was not owner of any property and therefore, no property passes on her death, which is to be subjected to estate-duty. Reliance was placed on the decision in the case of CED v. Smt. Anari Devi Halwasiya AIR 1972 All. 179. The Asstt. Controller of Estate Duty did not accept the claim of the AP and thereby rejected its contention referred to above relying on Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 and Hindu Succession Act, 1956 holding therein as under : In this connection it would be seen that Under Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937, the widow of a member of a Hindu Undivided Family is put in the place of her husband and her husband's interest is the joint family property, though indefinite would vest immediately upon his death in the widow. The widow who acquired the interest of her deceased husband Under Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 and who was possessed of the said interest on the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 becomes the absolute owner of the estate by option of Section 14 of the said Act and thus she would have all the rights of a full owner to possess, manage and enjoy exclusively and of disposal either by, ,any Act, inter vivo or by will the said estate. On her death intestate, her interest in the family properties would pass and devolve by succession on her heirs to that extent it would be required to be included in the estate liable to pay duty under the Estate Duty Act. In any case, the widow having become the absolute owner of the share which she inherited from her husband, would be competent to dispose it of, it being an incident of full ownership, and therefore, her interest would be deemed to be property passing on her death Under Section 6 of the E.D. Act. The widow of a member of a Hindu Undivided Family is put in the place of her husband and the husband's interest in the HUF property though indefinite, would vest immediately upon his death in his widow. The widow who acquired the interest of her deceased husband Under Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937 and who was possessed of the said interest on the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, become the absolute owner of the estate by operation of Section 14 of the later Act and thus she would have all the rights of a full owner and would be competent to dispose it of which is an incident of full ownership. Therefore, her interest would be deemed to be property passing on her death Under Section 5 or Section 6 of the E.D. Act. The right which has been given to a Hindu woman under the 1937 Act is also in lieu of partition, and therefore, if a notional partition were to take place shortly after her husband's death she would be entitled to the share.
(3.) FROM the above discussion, it would be seen that under the provisions of Section 3(2) of the Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, one half of her undivided interest of her deceased husband in the HUF property passed to her as widow's estate. The provisions of Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 are also applicable, and so the share which she acquired, is acquired as absolute owner and that share vested in her as full owner which passes on her death as property passing liable to be assessed Under Section 5 or Section 6 of the B.D. Act. These above views are supported by Gujarat High Court decision in the cases of Suketu Jayantilal Shah v. CED [1975] 100 ITR 439, Go swami Vrajraiji Ranchhodlalji Maharaj v. CED [1978] 112 ITR 851 and Sarabhai Tribhovandas v. CED [1981] 130 ITR 326. . ,;