https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67436 The Commissioner validly assumed jurisdiction under section 25(2) due to errors in the assessment orders by the Wealth-tax Officer (WTO) regarding the exemption claimed for Umed Bhavan Palace. The exemption under section 5(1)(iii) applies to the palace building and the land necessary for proper use, not the entire surrounding land. The assessment orders were found to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. The appeals were allowed, and the Commissioner's orders were vacated, directing the WTO to re-assess the wealth, considering the correct exemption criteria for Umed Bhavan Palace. en-us Tue, 27 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:05:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67436 The Commissioner validly assumed jurisdiction under section 25(2) due to errors in the assessment orders by the Wealth-tax Officer (WTO) regarding the exemption claimed for Umed Bhavan Palace. The exemption under section 5(1)(iii) applies to the palace building and the land necessary for proper use, not the entire surrounding land. The assessment orders were found to be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. The appeals were allowed, and the Commissioner's orders were vacated, directing the WTO to re-assess the wealth, considering the correct exemption criteria for Umed Bhavan Palace. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Tue, 27 Sep 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67436