Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Tribunal erred in law in directing that the recomputed valuation of the property (calculated under Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 and applying P.N. Sikand principles) shall not be less than the value returned by the assessee, and whether that question should be referred to the High Court under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
Analysis: The Court examined whether an admission in the wealth-tax return (a higher declared value) is conclusive such that a recomputed valuation under Rule 1BB cannot be lower than the returned value. The Court noted that an admission is important evidence but not conclusive and that in some circumstances a valuation lower than that returned may be correct. The Court observed that the question raises a legal issue of whether the Tribunal may impose a floor equal to the returned value when recomputing valuation under Rule 1BB and that resolving this question is necessary for full effect to be given to recomputation directed under the principles in P.N. Sikand's case.
Conclusion: The Court concluded that the question is one of law which arises out of the Tribunal's order and is not self-evident; it directed the Tribunal to draw up a consolidated statement of case and refer the stated question for the opinion of the High Court under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The applications by the assessee are disposed of accordingly in the assessee's favour.