TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Grants Substitution of Settlement Amount, Supports Irrecoverability Claims, and Resolves Land Valuation Disputes</h1> <h3>N. VALLIAMMAL (Smt.) & ANR. Versus ASSTT. CONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY.</h3> The Tribunal allowed the accountable persons' request to substitute the final settlement amount for the original valuation of debts due to the Estate, ... - Issues: Valuation of debts due to the Estate, Valuation of debt due from Palania Murugan Textiles, Recovery of debts from J.D. Radhakrishnan & Brothers, Claim regarding debts from G. Krishnaswami Naidu and G. Devarajulu Naidu, Valuation of lands at Koundampalayam, Valuation of Thudialur lands.Valuation of debts due to the Estate:The deceased had advanced a loan to a private company secured by properties. The company faced financial difficulties, and recovery of the debt was uncertain. The accountable persons expected only 50% of the principal amount at the time of filing the return. The Appellate Controller confirmed the Asstt. Controller's valuation, disallowing 50% of the principal amount as bad debt and interest. The Tribunal found no evidence to suggest a brighter prospect of recovery at the time of death. The Tribunal accepted the accountable persons' request to substitute the final settlement amount for the original valuation.Valuation of debt due from Palania Murugan Textiles:The deceased had lent a significant amount to a company, which later went into liquidation. Legal proceedings to recover the debt were unsuccessful. The accountable persons claimed 50% as irrecoverable, but the Appellate Controller adopted a different valuation. The Tribunal disagreed with the Appellate Controller's reasoning, noting that there was no evidence to support the full recovery of the debt. The Tribunal allowed the claim made by the accountable persons, directing the Asstt. Controller to provide relief accordingly.Recovery of debts from J.D. Radhakrishnan & Brothers:The deceased had advanced loans to a business, but no recovery could be made despite decrees. The accountable persons claimed 50% of the amount as not realizable, which the authorities did not allow. The Tribunal found the claim reasonable and directed the Asstt. Controller to allow the claim.Claim regarding debts from G. Krishnaswami Naidu and G. Devarajulu Naidu:A claim was made for amounts due from individuals, but the Appellate Controller rejected the claim due to lack of substantiation. The Tribunal upheld the rejection as the claim was not adequately supported with particulars.Valuation of lands at Koundampalayam:Disputes arose regarding the valuation of lands, with the Appellate Controller reducing the estimated value based on various factors. The Tribunal declined to interfere with the reduced estimate, considering the location and other arguments presented by the accountable persons.Valuation of Thudialur lands:The valuation of lands was contested, with differing values provided by the Asstt. Controller and the Appellate Controller. The Tribunal considered comparable sales and adjustments for location and time, ultimately fixing the value at a different amount. The Tribunal provided relief based on the revised valuation. Both appeals were partly allowed based on the Tribunal's findings and adjustments made to the valuations of debts and lands.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
