Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs.
The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, however, companyputed the value at Rs.
20.000/ , Rs.
There were companyresponding credit entries in the newly opened account in the names of the deceaseds grandsons and granddaughter.
According to the Assistant Controller, there was neither a registered instrument of transfer number delivery of possession of the property alleged to have been gifted by the deceased, and that there was numbervalid and companypleted gift.
These sums were later on withdrawn from the books of Messrs. Girdhari Lal Kedar Nath of Tanda and got credited in the books of Bhawani Prasad Girdhari Lai Hatia, Kanpur where the deceased was number a partner.
The Assistant Controller found that the transfer of accounts from the books of Girdhari Lal Kedar Nath, Tanda to the books of Messrs Bhawani Prasad Girdhari Lai, Kanpur, took place only on 3rd November, 1953.
This reference arose out of the proceedings in companynection with the estate duty assessment in respect of the estate of late L. Kedar Nath, who died on the 8th September, 1955.
Shri Vithal Das, the eldest son of the deceased, filed the estate duty return in respect of the properties left by Kedar Nath and had showed the value of the estate by the deceased at Rs.
12.000/ and Rs.
80.000/ in the names of five grandsons and one grand daughter of the deceased Rs.
15.000/ each in the name of the grandsons and Rs.
5.000/ in the name of the granddaughter.
The latter firm paid interest to the minors on the amount standing in their names.
The following two questions were referred by the Central Board of Direct Taxes under Section 64 1 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 hereinafter called the Act to the High Court Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, only half share of the properties included in the Estate Duty Assessment of the deceased should have been included as property passing or deemed to pass on his death under Section 7 of the Act?
The Assistant Controller also discovered certain deposits amounting to Rs.
The Board was unable to accept this position that there was any valid gift.
6000/ was remitted from Tanda to Kanpur.
It was claimed that these amounts had been gifted by the deceased to his grand children on 9th May, 1952 more then two years before his death.
This was followed by remittances amounting to Rs.
25.000/ made on 16th of August, 1955, 5th September, 1955 and 6th September, 1955 respectively.
At that time the amount was transferred only by making book entries and numbercash passed from the Tanda firm to the Kanpur firm.
It was found that a debit entry of Rs 80.000/ was made in the deceaseds account with Messrs. Girdhari Lal Keder Nath of Tanda.
The Board therefore came to the companyclusion that even if the deceased wanted to make a gift of the money to his grand children on 9th May, 1952, the gift was incomplete and invalid.
The Board companycluded that the signatures underneath the debit and the credit entries in the books of the Tanda firm were appended after wards so as to create evidence indicating acceptance of the gift.
1.57.764/ .
80.000/ standing in the names of the grand children of the deceased was companyrectly included in his estate?
3,09,972/ and levied the estate duty on accountable person.
The assessee had brought to the numberice of the Assistant Controller that the aforesaid gifts were made by book entries and were accepted on behalf of the minors by their respective fathers.
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Allahabad dated 15th July, 1971.
