Gift-tax valuation must reflect partnership restrictions on land, reducing value below full market worth.

Gift-tax valuation of lands placed under a partnership arrangement had to reflect the restrictions attached to them, including limits on alienation, pre-emption rights in favour of co-partners, and the continuation of those obligations against heirs. The donor transferred only burdened rights, not an unrestricted title, so a willing buyer would pay less than full market value for the property as if free from encumbrance. The argument that improvements merged with the land did not justify ignoring the contractual and proprietary constraints, and section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 did not support valuation at full market value. The lower valuation accepted by the first appellate authority was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for gift-tax valuation, the gifted lands had to be valued at their full market value as absolute property, or whether the partnership restrictions attached to the lands required a lower valuation.

Analysis: The lands, though not part of the firm's assets, had been placed at the disposal of the partnership under the deed for joint development and were subject to restrictions on alienation, pre-emption in favour of co-partners, and continuation of those obligations against legal heirs. The donor therefore did not transfer an unrestricted title, but only his rights in the lands as burdened by the partnership arrangement. Those contractual and proprietary limitations reduced the value which any willing purchaser would pay. The claim that the improvements merged with the land did not justify ignoring the restrictions, and the reference to section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, did not assist the Revenue in valuing the gift as though the lands were free from encumbrance.

Conclusion: The full market value adopted by the Gift-tax Officer was not justified, and the valuation accepted by the first appellate authority was upheld in favour of the assessee.

---