§ 52. Mr. Errollasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the cost to public funds of the Holt v. Estate Duty Office case; and what action he is taking against the officers in the Estate Duty Office who assessed the Holt shares valued at 19s. at the price of 34s. which proved to be indefensible.
§ Mr. Boyd-CarpenterThe information asked for in the first part of the Question is not yet available. As regards the second part, the figure of 34s. was the figure arrived at by a distinguished56W chartered accountant who was consulted by the Revenue and who gave evidence when the case was heard, and I cannot accept the suggestion that the officials concerned were at fault in accepting that advice. At the hearing the learned judge himself referred to the difficulty involved in assessing thecorrect value.