E. S. Pathak, J. - (1.) THIS is a re ference made by the Appellate Tribunal under Section 64 (1) of the Estate Duty Act,' 1953. The question referred is:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in holding that the deceased had no interest in the 2/3rd of the Hindu undivided family properties? If not, whether her interest was l/6th of the total Hindu undivided family assets?"
(2.) THERE was a Hindu undivided family consisting of D. P. Halwasiya, his two wives Tribeni Devi and Anari Devi, a son and three daughters. D. P. Hal wasiya died on December 22, 1957. Thereafter, Tribeni Devi died on Decem ber 5, 1958. This reference is concern ed with the estate duly payable on the death of Tribeni Devi. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty determined the extent of the interest held by Tribeni Devi in the Hindu undivided family property. He observed that on the death of her hus band she was entitled to a one-sixth share had there been a partition, and that she was also entitled under Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 to share equally with the other members in her husband's interest in the Hindu undivid ed family property assuming a notional partition. On that basis, he included a i/6th share and a 1/18th share of the fa mily property as the interest passing on her death for the purposes of estate duty.
(3.) ON appeal by the accountable person, the Zonal Appellate Controller expressed the view that the deceased did not have any share in the Hindu un divided family property under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, 1937 and, therefore, on the account the As sistant Controller was wrong in hold ing her entitled to a l/6th share. But applying Section 6 of the Hindu Succes sion Act, he held that as the husband upon partition before his death would have been entitled to a l/3rd share in the family property, a l/6th share in this interest devolved on Tribeni Devi, and therefore, she would have been en titled to a l/18th share in the family property. Two appeals were filed before the Appellate Tribunal, one by the ac countable person and the other by the Assistant Controller. During the hear ing of the appeals, the Departmental Representative conceded that on the basis of the interest devolving on Tribeni Devi upon her husband's death she was entitled to a l/30th share of the Hindu undivided family property. The Appel late Tribunal found accordingly. The Appellate Tribunal also held that she did not have any interest in the balance of the family property left after carving out the husband s share. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.;