<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1982 (6) TMI 121 - ITAT GAUHATI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65776</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT GAUHATI set aside the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax&#039;s orders for the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76, and 1976-77 due to the failure to hear the Departmental Valuer during appeal proceedings, deeming it a significant irregularity. The Tribunal emphasized the need for justice and overturned the valuation orders for co-owners, allowing for a re-determination of the valuation in conjunction with other co-owners. The Tribunal rejected the argument that valuation accepted for one co-owner automatically applies to others, citing reassessments initiated for all co-owners due to alleged undervaluation. Ultimately, the appeals were rejected for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:50:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=104213" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (6) TMI 121 - ITAT GAUHATI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65776</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal ITAT GAUHATI set aside the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax&#039;s orders for the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76, and 1976-77 due to the failure to hear the Departmental Valuer during appeal proceedings, deeming it a significant irregularity. The Tribunal emphasized the need for justice and overturned the valuation orders for co-owners, allowing for a re-determination of the valuation in conjunction with other co-owners. The Tribunal rejected the argument that valuation accepted for one co-owner automatically applies to others, citing reassessments initiated for all co-owners due to alleged undervaluation. Ultimately, the appeals were rejected for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=65776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>