Municipal rateable valuation: embedded air-conditioning machinery excluded, but wooden partitions and ground rent included; notional interest rejected.

Under the municipal valuation scheme, machinery used in a building may be excluded from rateable value even if embedded in the structure and forming part of a central air-conditioning system; the related false ceiling also followed that exclusion because it was installed only to support the system. Wooden partitions, however, were treated as part of the original building design and remained includible in construction cost, and ground rent on Government land was also properly included on the facts. Notional interest on the owner's own capital was not an actual expenditure and could not be added to construction cost for rateable valuation, so the valuation had to be recomputed after excluding that item.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the cost of centrally air-conditioning machinery and the related false ceiling was excludible from the rateable value under section 154(2) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888; (ii) whether wooden partitions, ground rent, and notional interest on own capital were rightly included in the cost of construction for determining rateable value.

Issue (i): Whether the cost of centrally air-conditioning machinery and the related false ceiling was excludible from the rateable value under section 154(2) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.

Analysis: The exemption in section 154(2) was held to apply to machinery even where it was embedded in the building and became part of the overall air-conditioning system. The decisive consideration was the legislative exclusion of machinery from rateable value, and that exclusion could not be denied merely because the apparatus was installed as part of a central air-conditioning arrangement. Since the false ceiling was necessitated only to support and facilitate that air-conditioning system, its cost also stood on the same footing.

Conclusion: The cost of items (a) and (b) was required to be excluded, in favour of the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether wooden partitions, ground rent, and notional interest on own capital were rightly included in the cost of construction for determining rateable value.

Analysis: The wooden partitions were conceived as part of the building from the inception and were used to divide the floors into office spaces, so their cost formed part of construction cost and did not attract the machinery exclusion. Ground rent on Government land was also properly included on the facts, as the tax incidence did not result in double levy in the manner suggested. By contrast, notional interest on the appellant's own capital was not an actual expenditure and could not be treated as part of construction cost for rateable valuation; a taxing provision had to be construed in a manner favourable to the assessee where two reasonable views were possible.

Conclusion: Wooden partitions and ground rent were rightly included, but notional interest on own capital was not includible; the assessee succeeded only to that extent.

Final Conclusion: The rateable value had to be recomputed after excluding the cost of air-conditioning machinery, the related false ceiling, and notional interest on own capital, while maintaining inclusion of the wooden partitions and ground rent.

Ratio Decidendi: Under the municipal valuation scheme, machinery used in a building may be excluded from rateable value despite its incorporation into the structure, and notional interest on self-financed construction does not form part of construction cost where the taxing provision admits a construction favourable to the assessee.

---