KHORSHED SHAPOOR CHENAI MRS Vs. CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY ASST
LAWS(APH)-1971-11-26
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on November 17,1971

KHORSHED SHAPOOR CHENAI Appellant
VERSUS
ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Sriramulu, J. - (1.) LANDS in Moosapet village belonging to Rashid Shapoor Chenai were acquired by the Government, under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, for synthetic drugs project. Compensation awarded for those lands by the Special Deputy Collector was received by Rashid Shapoor Chenai. Later, land in Qutbullapur village belonging to him were also acquired by the Government for H.M.T. Units I and II. Awards in respect of these lands, which were required for lands at Rs. 4,29,360.68. Rashid Shapoor Chenai died on November 4, 1963, and the above compensation was received by the legal heirs of Rashid Shapoor Chenai. Estate duty assessment in respect of the properties passing on the death of Rashid Shapoor Chenai was made by the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty on March 29, 1966. The values of these lands for the purpose of computing the estate duty in respect of the properties that passed on the death of Rashid Shapoor Chenai were taken at the respective figures of compensation awarded for them by the Special Deputy Collector,
(2.) THE legal heirs of Rashid Shapoor Chenai did not accept the awards made by the Special Deputy Collector in respect of those .lands and objected to the amount of compensation awarded, and, accordingly, required the Special Deputy Collector, by applications filed within the time prescribed, to refer the matter of the determination of compensation, under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, to the civil court. References were, accordingly, made and the civil courts, by their orders of March 6, 1967, enhanced the compensation awarded by the Special Deputy Collector in respect of Moosapet land by Rs. 1,90,000, and by its order dated October 30, 1967, enhanced the compensation in respect of Qutbullapur lands by Rs. 20,45,000. On coming to know that the civil courts had enhanced the compensation in respect of those lands, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty issued notice to the legal representatives of Rashid Shapoor Chenai under Section 61 of the Estate Duty Act, to show cause why the mistake apparent from the record should not be rectified by including the enhanced compensation awarded by the civil courts in the net value of the dutiable estate ? The legality and the validity of that notice is being challenged by the legal representative of Rashid Shapoor Chenai in Writ Petition No. 4059/1969. Mrs. Freny Rashid. Chenai v. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty [1973] 90 I.T.R, 81 (A.P).--See Supra, Rashid Shapoor Chenai died leaving behind him his widow and a son, named S. R. Chenai. Unfortunately, within a short period of less than two years, from the date of death of his father, S.R. Chenai died on May 7, 1965. In this writ petition, the petitioner is the widow and the person accountable for payment of estate duty in respect of property passing on the death of S. R. Chenai (hereinafter referred to as " the deceased "). The deceased held one-half share in the undivided estate of his late father, Rashid Shapoor Chenai. As required by Section 53 of the Estate Duty Act (hereinafter called "the Act") the petitioner filed an account of the property passing on the death of her husband, the deceased, and the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty completed the estate duty assessment on December 30, 1966. In making the said assessment the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, as in the case of estate duty assessment in respect of property passing on the death of Rashid Shapoor Chenai, adopted the values of the lands of Rashid Shapoor Chenai, acquired by the Government for synthetic drugs project and H.M.T. at the same figures of compensation respectively awarded by the Special Deputy Collector for those lands.
(3.) THE petitioner filed an appeal against the estate duty assessment before the Appellate Controller and a further appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, but on points other than the question of valuation of the above said lands. On the basis of information in his possession regarding the allowance of higher compensation for those lands by the civil courts, the Assistant Controller of Estate Duty issued notice dated November 14, 1969, to the petitioner, under Section 59(a) of the Estate Duty Act, to show cause why the estate duty assessment made on December 30, 1966, should not be reopened and revised by including the enhanced compensation awarded by the civil courts in respect of those lands.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.