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>Tribunal values shares based on balance sheet, assessee prevails over Gift-tax Officer. Commissioner to cover costs.</h1> The Tribunal correctly based its valuation of shares on the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963, following the decision in Lynall v. Inland Revenue ... Gift Tax, Valuation Date Issues Involved:1. Legality of the Tribunal's finding based on the House of Lords' decision in Lynall v. Inland Revenue Commissioners regarding the valuation date of shares.2. Correctness of the Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's valuation of shares and deletion of Rs. 27,360 added by the Gift-tax Officer under section 15(3) of the Gift-tax Act.3. Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the valuation of shares should not be made on an ex-right basis for the right shares issued by the company (not pressed by the assessee).Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Legality of the Tribunal's Finding Based on Lynall v. Inland Revenue CommissionersThe Tribunal's finding was based on the decision of the House of Lords in Lynall v. Inland Revenue Commissioners. The main question was whether the valuation of the shares of Bakubhai and Ambalal Ltd., London, should be based on the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963, instead of March 31, 1964. The Tribunal held that since the only balance-sheet available at the date of the gift (October 17, 1964) was the one as of March 31, 1963, the break-up value method should be applied using this balance-sheet. The Tribunal distinguished this case from Miss Dhun Dadabhoy Kapadia v. Commissioner of Income-tax and followed the decision in Lynall, which emphasized that a hypothetical purchaser would only have access to information available to all shareholders at the time of the gift. Therefore, the Tribunal was correct in using the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963, for valuation.Issue 2: Correctness of the Tribunal's Acceptance of the Assessee's Valuation and Deletion of Rs. 27,360The Gift-tax Officer had valued the shares at Rs. 507 per share based on the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1964, while the assessee valued the shares at Rs. 450 per share based on the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's valuation, reasoning that the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1964, was not available to ordinary shareholders on October 17, 1964. The Tribunal concluded that the break-up value method should be applied using the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963, which was the latest available balance-sheet at the time of the gift. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the addition of Rs. 27,360 made by the Gift-tax Officer under section 15(3) of the Gift-tax Act.Issue 3: Valuation of Shares on an Ex-right Basis (Not Pressed)The assessee did not press the question regarding the valuation of shares on an ex-right basis for the right shares issued by the company. Therefore, the court did not address this issue in the judgment.Conclusion:The Tribunal was correct in holding that the shares should be valued based on the break-up value method using the balance-sheet as of March 31, 1963. The Tribunal's acceptance of the assessee's valuation and the deletion of Rs. 27,360 added by the Gift-tax Officer were also upheld. The question regarding the valuation of shares on an ex-right basis was not pressed by the assessee and was not addressed by the court. The judgment was in favor of the assessee for the issues pressed, with the Commissioner ordered to pay the costs of the reference.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found