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.
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 / NCLT & Others
  • 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
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
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
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



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 :

        1992 (5) TMI 42 - AT - Wealth-tax

        📋
        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

        Tribunal upholds flat valuation for wealth tax, dismisses appeals. Rule 1BB applied, no new arguments allowed. The tribunal dismissed the appeals by the assessee, upholding the valuation of the flat for wealth tax purposes at Rs. 6,28,125 per assessment year. It ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal upholds flat valuation for wealth tax, dismisses appeals. Rule 1BB applied, no new arguments allowed.

                            The tribunal dismissed the appeals by the assessee, upholding the valuation of the flat for wealth tax purposes at Rs. 6,28,125 per assessment year. It was determined that Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules should be applied in this case, and the direction to make a reference to the Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act was deemed appropriate. The plea to introduce an additional argument regarding share valuation was rejected as inconsistent with prior positions, leading to the overall dismissal of the appeals.




                            Issues: Valuation of a flat for wealth tax purposes, applicability of Rule 1BB of Wealth-tax Rules, direction to make a reference to Valuation Officer under section 16A of Wealth-tax Act, permission to raise additional plea regarding share valuation under Wealth-tax Act.

                            Valuation of Flat for Wealth Tax Purposes:
                            The dispute in this case revolves around the valuation of a flat in Bombay for wealth tax assessment. The assessee, a private limited company, purchased the flat in 1960-61 and initially valued it at Rs. 21,950, later revised to Rs. 50,250 based on a report from an Approved Valuer. The Assessing Officer, however, valued the flat at Rs. 6,28,125 for each assessment year, capitalizing it at 12.5%. The main contention was whether Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, which governs the valuation of residential flats, should be applied in this case.

                            Applicability of Rule 1BB of Wealth-tax Rules:
                            The assessee argued that the valuation of the flat should be done in accordance with Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, citing decisions of the Tribunal and the Bombay High Court to support their stance. They contended that the CWT (Appeals) erred in setting aside the assessment and directing a reference to the Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee emphasized that the valuation should have been determined by the departmental authorities as per Rule 1BB, specifically for residential flats of the company.

                            Direction to Make a Reference to Valuation Officer under Section 16A:
                            The CWT (Appeals) set aside the assessments, directing the WTO to make a reference to the Valuation Officer, invoking section 16A(b)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee argued that the CWT (A) had no authority to direct the Assessing Officer to make such a reference post-assessment, citing relevant court decisions. On the other hand, the revenue representative supported the CWT (A)'s order, asserting that the appellate authority could indeed direct such a reference due to the pending appeal.

                            Permission to Raise Additional Plea Regarding Share Valuation:
                            The assessee sought permission to introduce an additional plea regarding the valuation of shares held in a company, contending that it falls outside the purview of Wealth-tax under section 40 of the Finance Act, 1983. The revenue representative opposed this plea, arguing that it was inconsistent with the assessee's previous stance. The tribunal rejected the plea, noting that the new claim contradicted the assessee's earlier assertions and required further investigation.

                            Conclusion:
                            The tribunal held that the appeals by the assessee lacked merit and were consequently dismissed. The valuation of the flat, applicability of Rule 1BB, the direction to make a reference to the Valuation Officer, and the permission to raise an additional plea were thoroughly analyzed and decided upon in this judgment.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found