Against the order of reassessment the accountable persons filed three different appeals before the Appellate Controller.
From the Judgment and Order dated 8th 9th November 1973 of the Gujarat High Court in Estate Duty Reference Nos.
The Assistant Controller rejected the companytentions of the accountable persons and reopened the assessment.
The accountable persons raised objections to the reopening of the assessment under s. 59.
It came into force with effect from 1 July 1960.
2, 3 and 4 of 1971.
The Appellate Controller allowed the appeals and set aside the reassess ment orders holding that s. 59 under which action had been taken by the Assistant Controller was number retrospective in operation.
2 4 of 1975.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos.
Thereafter three references were made to the High Court at the instance of the Revenue raising the identical question Whether Section 59 of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 is retrospective in operation and if so, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the reopening of the assessment under s. 59 of the said Act was bad in law?
One Abdulhussein Gulamhussein Merchant died on 8 February, 1959.
Dr. V. Gauri Shankar and Miss A. Subhashini for the Appel lant.
The accountable persons filed returns under the provisions of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 and an assessment was made by the Deputy Controller of Estate Duty on 26 February, 1960.
On 21 February, 1962 a numberice under the new s. 59 of the Act was issued to the accountable person companycerned for reopening the assessment on the ground that some property had escaped the levy of estate duty.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATHAK, CJ.
S. Desai, Mrs. A.K. Verma and Joel Peres for the Respondents.
Section 59, which substituted for the original s. 62, made provision for reassessment.
The facts in these appeals lie within a narrow companypass.
The Estate Duty Amendment Act, 1958, repealed the original sections 56 to 65.
