Law:

Section:

Section 27, read with section 7, of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Reference - Question of law - Assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65 and 1966-67 to 1972-73 - Assessee declared certain value of his house property in return - WTO referred it to a valuer and accepted value determined by him - On second appeal Tribunal accepted assessee's contention that Valuation Officer had, inter alia, not deducted 50 per cent of unearned increase to be paid to Land and Development Officer as transfer, in arriving at valuation and directed WTO to recompute value of property in question taking into consideration deduction claimed by assessee but see that recomputed value of property would not be less than that returned by assessee - Whether any question of law was referable from Tribunal's order - Held, yes Facts The assessee had indicated a certain value of his house in the return. The WTO referred the matter to a valuer and accepted the value determined by him. On appeal, the assessee contended before the AAC that the Valuation Officer had, inter alia, not deducted 50 per cent of unearned increase to be paid to the Land and Development Officer on transfer, in arriving at the valuation. However, the AAC upheld the order of the WTO. On second appeal, the Tribunal held that after 1951, the aforesaid payment became obligatory and that the aforesaid amount had to be allowed deduction in arriving at the valuation of the property. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the WTO to recompute the value of the property in different years but the recomputed value would not be less than that returned by the assessee in those years. The reference application of the assessee was also rejected. On an application under section 27(3): Held In the instant case, the basic question was if the value as calculated under rule 1BB was less than the value shown in the return, could the assessee get the benefit of the lower value ? This was a question, which needed determination and required to be referred, as otherwise recomputation of the value of the property on the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of CWT v. P.N. Sikand [1977]107 ITR 922 would not be fully carried out. Hence, the reference…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492