Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for valuing unquoted equity shares transferred for gift-tax purposes, the break-up method under Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 was mandatory or whether the yield method was the proper method of valuation, and whether the gift-tax assessments based on break-up value were liable to be cancelled.
Analysis: The applicable valuation principle was that, for shares of a going concern not quoted on the stock exchange, the yield method ordinarily represents the market value, while the break-up method is resorted to only in exceptional circumstances, such as where the company is ripe for winding up or where profit-earning capacity cannot reasonably be estimated. Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 prescribing the break-up method was treated as directory rather than mandatory. On the facts, no exceptional circumstance justified departure from the yield method, and the Assessing Officer was not justified in substituting break-up value for valuation of the shares.
Conclusion: The yield method was the proper method of valuation, the gift-tax assessments based on the break-up method were unsustainable, and the cancellation of those assessments was correct.