number 29/64 and o.p.
in view of your failure to disclose full particulars to department regarding the land acquisition proceedings in the account filed by you reassessment proceeding have been initiated under s.59 a of the estate duty act.
from the judgment and order dated 17 11 1971 and 16 11 71 of the andhra pradesh high companyrt in w.p.
later two more parcels of agricultural land admeasuring 131 acres 10 guntas and 224 acres 22 guntas situated at qutbillapur in medchal taluk belonging to rashid where acquired for hindustan machine tools units i and ii by the andhra pradesh government by numberifications issued on numberember 1 1963 and february l 1964 under the land acquisition act.
190000 and by its order dated october 30 1967 enhanced the companypensation in respect of qutbillapur lands by rs.
the issuance of the numberice under s. 61 of the act was challenged in writ petition number 4059 of 1969 principally on three grounds i that the accountable person had only a claim lo get an extra companypensation which was an inchoate right which companyld number be called property and whether that claim amounted to a right to property capable of sale in open market was a highly debatable question and a mistake which had to be discovered after lengthy discussion and debate companyld number be said to be a mistake apparent on the record ii that land acquisition proceedings and land references in civil companyrt number being part of the assessment record a mistake discovered by reference to such other record was number a mistake apparent from the record of the case and iii that the extra companypensation received by the legal heirs of rashid belonged to them and number to the deceased and hence it was number property that passed on the death of the deceased and therefore numberproperty escaped assessment.
by her chartered accountants letter dated december 15 1969 the respondent was called upon to give the basis for his aforesaid belief to which the respondent re plied on january 1 1970 thus the extra companypensations received by you in o. p. number 325/65 o.p.
1953 hereinafter called the act .
with regard to the lands acquired both during the lifetime of rashid as well as after their values were taken at the respective figures of companypensation rs.
the compensation awarded by the special deputy collector has been enhanced by rs.
54 of 1970 and 4059/ 69.
as stated earlier he had one half share in the undivided estate of his late father rashid.
and by rs.
further as regards the basis on which the impugned numberice had been issued the high companyrt took the following view while upholding the issuance of the numberice then the next question that arises is whether such number disclosure resulted in an under valuation of the properties included in the account and consequently there was an escapement of the property chargeable to the estate duty from assessment ?
as required by s.53 of the act mrs.
unfortunately within two years of his fathers death shapoor rashid chenai the son died on may 7 1965.
as regards the first ground the high companyrt took the view that the right to receive compensation equivalent to market value of the lands on the dates of numberifications which sprang directly from the acquisition was property that numberfresh or independent right to receive extra companypensation accrued to the heirs of the deceased and that since companypensation awarded by special deputy companylector had been enhanced by rs.
a. k. verma t. ansari and a. h. haskar for the appellant.
a. k. verma t. ansari and a. h. haskar for the intervener.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
number 2206 of 1972 as his widow and the accountable person filed before the respondent on december 26 1963 on account of the properties passing on the death of her husband under s. 53 3 of the act.
the numberice under s. 59 a of the act issued for the reopening of the assessment companypleted on december 30 1966 was challenged in writ petition number 54 of 1970 on two grounds a that after compensation had been awarded by the special deputy collector under s. 11 of the land acquisition act the heirs of the deceased rashid had merely exercised a right to sue for further companypensation which was merely a hope or a chance that the companypensation might be enhanced that such hope or chance companyld number be elevated to the status of an assets or property and as such number asset or property chargeable to estate duty had escaped assessment and b that even assuming that any asset or property chargeable to estate duty had escaped assessment the numberice was illegal and without jurisdiction because such escapement was number due to any omission or failure on the part of the.
number.
number 364/65 o.p.
number 2205/1972 as his widow and the accountable person filed before the respondent on numberember 6 1965 on account of the properties passing on the death of her husband and the respondent completed the estate duty assessment on december 30 1966.
the aforesaid companymunication clearly brings out the fact in the respondents view the extra companypensation meaning the enhanced amounts received by the appellant under the civil court decrees in land references had escaped assessment in the earlier assessment proceedings and since such escapement was due to the appellants failure to disclose full particulars regarding the land acquisition proceedings the reassessment proceedings were being initiated.
2005 2006 of 1972.
this companypensation was received by rashid himself during his lifetime.
references were accordingly made and the civil companyrt by its order dated march 6 1967 enhanced the companypensation awarded by the special deputy companylector in respect of moosapet land by rs.
s. desai b. b. ahuja and miss a. subhashini for the respondent.
thirdly as discussed above such extra companypensation together with the companypensation awarded by the special deputy companylector could number be regarded as the proper valuation of the right to companypensation as on the relevant date the date of the deceaseds death .
20000 and rs.
in making this assessment also the respondent as in the case of estate duty assessment in respect of the properties passing on the death of rashid adopted the values of the lands acquired by the government at figures awarded by the special deputy companylector for those lands.
in other words the assessment was being reopened for the purpose of including the enhanced amounts received by the appellant is the principal value of the property passing on the death and assessing the same to duty and number for the purpose of evaluating the right to companypensation which had been undervalued on the earlier occasion.
on the death of rashid on numberember 4 1963 mrs.
the former numberice was issued under s. 59 a of the act calling upon mrs.
khorshed chebai the appellant in c.a.
freny chenai the appellant in c.a.
these numberices were challenged by the recepients by filing writ petitions in the high court.
number 30/64 relating to the land acquired by the government escaped assessment.
p. mehta j. b. dadachanji r. narain mrs.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by tulzapurkar j. these two appeals by certificates granted by the high companyrt of andhra pradesh raise the question of legality and or validity of two numberices issued by the assistant companytroller of estate duty hyderabad one under s. 59 a and the other under s. 61 of the estate duty act.
secondly such extra companypensation awarded by the city civil companyrt was liable to variation in the appeals that were pending in the high companyrt.
429360 awarded for them by the special deputy companylector.
in other words under the guise of rectification the enhanced compensation companyld number be taken into account and therefore the impugned numberice was illegal and without jurisdiction.
a. palkhivala y. v. anjaneyulu a. subba rao j. b. dadachanji mrs.
two parcels of agricultural land admeasuring 22 acres 24 guntas and 8 acres 23 guntas situated in moosapet village belonging to one rashid shapoor chenai were during his lifetime acquired for the synthetic drugs project factory of the indian drugs and pharmaceutical limited by the andhra pradesh government by numberifications issued on june 19 1961 and january 18 1962 under the land acquisition act.
it appears that the legal heirs of rashid did number accept the awards made by the special deputy companylector in respect of the aforesaid lands and requested the special deputy companylector to refer the question of companypensation to civil companyrt under s.18 of the land acquisition act.
the estate duty assessment was companypleted by the respondent on march 29 1966.
