| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1968 SLG 175 1968 SLD 175 (1968) 68 ITR 729 |
Kerala High Court
IT REFERRED CASE No. 15 OF 1966, SEPTEMBER 1, 1967
M.S. MENON, C.J. M.U. ISAAC AND V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI, JJ
C.T. Peter for the Applicant. K. S. Paripoornan, M. Radhakrishnan Nair and M. N. Sukumaran Nair for the
Respondent
IT REFERRED CASE No. 15 OF 1966, SEPTEMBER 1, 1967
M.S. MENON, C.J. M.U. ISAAC AND V. BALAKRISHNA ERADI, JJ
C.T. Peter for the Applicant. K. S. Paripoornan, M. Radhakrishnan Nair and M. N. Sukumaran Nair for the
Respondent
Commissioner of Gifttax
v.
Dr. V. Madhavan Valiathan
Law:
Section:
Sections 23, read with section 26, of the Gift-tax Act, 1958 - Appellate Tribunal - In appeal proceedings before Tribunal, valuers were appointed under section 23(6) to value items of gifted property - Assessee objected to adoption of valuers' valuation, and therefore, Tribunal determined value of said gifted property - At revenue's instance Tribunal referred question as to whether it was right in law in altering valuation fixed by valuers under section 23(6) - Whether since question of law covered by reference had been neither raised before Tribunal nor considered by it, it could not be regarded as a question 'arising out of' order, of Tribunal - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, reference made by Tribunal was incompetent and answer to such reference was to be declined - Held, yes FACTS The GTO determined the value of the property gifted by the assessee and his wife to their children. In the further appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal, valuers were appointed under section 23(6) to value this item of property. The valuers determined the value of this item. The assessee objected to the adoption of the valuation of this property as determined by the valuers. The Tribunal agreeing with the assessee, reduced the valuation. At the instance of the revenue, the Tribunal referred under section 26(1) the question whether the Tribunal was right in law in altering the valuation fixed by the valuers under section 23(6). On reference : HELD Since the question of law covered by the reference had been neither raised before the Tribunal nor considered by it, it could not be regarded as a question "arising out of" the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the reference made was incompetent and on this ground, answer to the question was declined. Note : The case was decided in favour of the assessee. CASES REFERRED TO CIT v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 589 (SC), Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1965] 56 ITR 365 (SC) and Madanlal Dharnidharka v. CIT [1948]16 ITR 227 (SC) JUDGMENT Balakrishna Eradi, J.-This is a reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), under section 26(1) of the Gift-tax Act,…
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