TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for wealth-tax purposes, urban land declared as excess under the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 was to be valued at its full fair market value or by taking into account the statutory ceiling, retention limit, and the compensation payable for the excess land.
Analysis: The land was admittedly governed by the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 and only 1500 sq. mtrs. could be retained. The remaining land stood declared as excess and was liable to acquisition under the statutory scheme. The remote possibility of retaining some excess land by undertaking construction and complying with restrictive conditions did not alter the valuation on the relevant date. For wealth-tax valuation, the property had to be valued as it existed on the valuation date, and speculative or contingent benefits burdened with substantial statutory fetters could not form the basis for valuation. The proper approach was therefore to value the retained area at market value and the excess land in accordance with the compensation payable under the ceiling law.
Conclusion: The valuation directed by the first appellate authority was upheld, and the revisional order was required to be modified accordingly; the assessee succeeded on the valuation issue.
TaxTMI 
