<?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>1987 (4) TMI 132 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67969</link>
    <description>Property valued under the wealth-tax regime may be adopted for estate duty purposes where the governing valuation provision is applied retrospectively to reflect legislative intent. A self-occupied property was therefore to be taken at the wealth-tax value. For a wholly let-out commercial property, valuation had to follow the rental capitalisation method, allowing the recognised statutory deductions for municipal taxes, repairs and collection charges, and capitalising the net annual letting value. A separate addition for speculative future construction potential was not justified where the property was already let out and not in the accountable person&#039;s possession. The estate duty valuation was to be recomputed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Mar 2011 18:58:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=106404" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (4) TMI 132 - ITAT JAIPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67969</link>
      <description>Property valued under the wealth-tax regime may be adopted for estate duty purposes where the governing valuation provision is applied retrospectively to reflect legislative intent. A self-occupied property was therefore to be taken at the wealth-tax value. For a wholly let-out commercial property, valuation had to follow the rental capitalisation method, allowing the recognised statutory deductions for municipal taxes, repairs and collection charges, and capitalising the net annual letting value. A separate addition for speculative future construction potential was not justified where the property was already let out and not in the accountable person&#039;s possession. The estate duty valuation was to be recomputed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>