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 Orders Recalculation of Cinemas' Valuation Methods, Emphasizes Precedents</h1> The Tribunal directed the valuation of Odeon Cinema and Naaz Cinema to be recalculated using the income capitalisation method, considering average income ... High Court, Immovable Property, Market Value, Movable Property, Municipal Corporation, Valuation Date, Valuation Officer Issues Involved:1. Valuation of Odeon Cinema, Connaught Place, New Delhi.2. Valuation of Naaz Cinema, Lucknow.3. Valuation of land at Shanker Road, New Delhi.4. Valuation of property at Faiz Bazar, Daryaganj, New Delhi.Detailed Analysis:1. Valuation of Odeon Cinema, Connaught Place, New Delhi:The dispute centers on the valuation method for Odeon Cinema. The initial value fixed by the Settlement Commission was Rs. 46,57,490 for the assessment year 1976-77. The Valuation Officer (V.O.) used the rent capitalisation method for the let-out portion and the land & building method for the self-occupied area, resulting in a value of Rs. 78,85,950 for 1978-79, which increased to Rs. 2,72,65,000 by 1983-84. The CWT(A) agreed with the V.O.'s method but applied a uniform multiplier of 12.5% for the let-out portion and adjusted the land rates for the self-occupied portion, resulting in a lower value of Rs. 53,64,194 for 1978-79 and Rs. 1,43,80,024 for 1983-84.The assessee contended that the entire property should be valued using the income capitalisation method, supported by CBDT circulars and various High Court decisions. The CWT(A) rejected this, citing the fluctuating nature of the cinema business and the potential for loss, which would make the income capitalisation method unreliable. The CWT(A) also considered the rates taken by the Delhi High Court in a similar case and adjusted the land rates accordingly.Upon review, the Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred in using the cost replacement method and should have used the income capitalisation method. The Tribunal emphasized that commercial properties are generally valued based on their income potential, and the income capitalisation method is supported by judicial precedents and CBDT circulars. The Tribunal directed that the value be recalculated using the income capitalisation method, with appropriate deductions for outgoings and a multiplier of 8.2. Valuation of Naaz Cinema, Lucknow:The V.O. initially valued Naaz Cinema at Rs. 11,22,000 for 1978-79 to 1980-81 using the income capitalisation method. For 1981-82 to 1983-84, the V.O. switched to the land and building method, resulting in higher values. The CWT(A) upheld the land and building method but directed the V.O. to rework the valuation for 1978-79 and 1979-80 based on average income, with the lower of the two figures being adopted.The Tribunal found that the lower authorities should have consistently used the income capitalisation method for Naaz Cinema, as it is a commercial property. The Tribunal directed that the value be recalculated using the income capitalisation method, with the average income of the previous four years being considered.3. Valuation of Land at Shanker Road, New Delhi:The land at Shanker Road was initially leased for constructing a cinema, but due to various legal challenges and objections from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), the construction could not proceed. The V.O. valued the land as residential property, relying on sale instances from New Rajinder Nagar and taking the area as 3954 sq. yards.The CWT(A) upheld the V.O.'s valuation, treating the plot as residential and valuing the excess area separately. The assessee contended that the land should be valued based on its actual use and the ongoing litigation, which made it unattractive to potential buyers.The Tribunal found that the lower authorities erred in treating the plot as residential and not considering the ongoing litigation and restrictions on the land. The Tribunal directed that the value returned by the assessee be accepted, as there was no reliable data to suggest a higher market value.4. Valuation of Property at Faiz Bazar, Daryaganj, New Delhi:[Details not provided in the text]Conclusion:The Tribunal directed that the valuation of Odeon Cinema and Naaz Cinema be recalculated using the income capitalisation method, considering the average income of the previous years and appropriate deductions. For the land at Shanker Road, the Tribunal accepted the value returned by the assessee, considering the ongoing litigation and restrictions. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of using appropriate valuation methods based on the nature and use of the property, supported by judicial precedents and CBDT circulars.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found