Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Appellate Tribunal justified in using rental method for property valuation, rules court.</h1> The court concluded that the Appellate Tribunal was justified in adopting the rental method for valuing the property and directing the Commissioner of ... Powers Of Tribunal, Question Of Law Issues Involved:1. Justification of the Appellate Tribunal in determining the value of the property on a rental basis applying rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957.2. Justification of the Appellate Tribunal in directing the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) to determine the value of the property gifted on a rental basis while setting aside the assessment.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Justification of the Appellate Tribunal in determining the value of the property on a rental basis applying rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957.The core issue revolves around whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the value of the property should be determined on a rental basis by applying rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957. The property in question, located at No. 32, Nungambakkam High Road, Madras, was transferred by way of gift on February 1, 1974. The Gift-tax Officer initially valued the property at Rs. 3,25,700 based on the Assistant Valuation Officer's report, which considered the area and depreciated value of the superstructure. The Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) later reduced this value to Rs. 2,25,000. Upon appeal, the Tribunal opined that for let-out properties, the rental method should be adopted for valuation. The Tribunal noted that the value should not exceed Rs. 1,81,020, as argued by the assessee based on rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, which was in effect from April 1, 1979, to March 31, 1989.However, the court noted that rule 1BB was not in force during the relevant assessment year (1974-75) and there was no link between the Gift-tax Act and the Wealth-tax Act at that time. Despite this, the Tribunal did not explicitly refer to rule 1BB but rather to the generally accepted rental method for valuing let-out properties. The court acknowledged that the rental method was recognized even before rule 1BB was introduced and could be applied independently of the Wealth-tax Rules.Issue 2: Justification of the Appellate Tribunal in directing the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) to determine the value of the property gifted on a rental basis while setting aside the assessment.The Tribunal had remanded the matter back to the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) to determine the value on a rental basis, allowing the Commissioner to ascertain the fresh value through the Departmental valuer and confront the same to the assessee before making a final decision. The court considered the argument that the valuation should be based on the Valuation Officer's report as per section 15(6) of the Gift-tax Act, which allows the Assessing Officer to refer the valuation to a Valuation Officer if the returned value is believed to be less than the fair market value.The respondent-assessee argued that the Tribunal's decision was based on the well-recognized rental method, not specifically on rule 1BB. The court referred to precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in CWT v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup and Sons, which held that rule 1BB is a procedural rule applicable to all pending proceedings under the Wealth-tax Act as of April 1, 1979. The court also cited the Bombay High Court's decision in Jehangir Mahomedali Chagla v. M. V. Subrahmanian, which applied the rental method under rule 1BB to the Estate Duty Act despite no explicit link between the Acts.Ultimately, the court found significant merit in the argument that the rental method should be adopted for valuing let-out properties, as it is a well-accepted valuation method. The court emphasized the importance of achieving uniformity in valuation and avoiding disparate valuations for similar properties.Conclusion:The court concluded that the Tribunal was justified in adopting the rental method for valuing the property and directing the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) to determine the value on this basis. The court deleted the clause 'applying rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957' from the first question and answered both questions in the affirmative, against the Revenue. No costs were awarded.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found