<?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 138 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68955</link>
    <description>Gift-tax valuation of lands placed under a partnership arrangement had to reflect the restrictions attached to them, including limits on alienation, pre-emption rights in favour of co-partners, and the continuation of those obligations against heirs. The donor transferred only burdened rights, not an unrestricted title, so a willing buyer would pay less than full market value for the property as if free from encumbrance. The argument that improvements merged with the land did not justify ignoring the contractual and proprietary constraints, and section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 did not support valuation at full market value. The lower valuation accepted by the first appellate authority was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 12:01:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=107327" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (6) TMI 138 - ITAT MADRAS-A</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68955</link>
      <description>Gift-tax valuation of lands placed under a partnership arrangement had to reflect the restrictions attached to them, including limits on alienation, pre-emption rights in favour of co-partners, and the continuation of those obligations against heirs. The donor transferred only burdened rights, not an unrestricted title, so a willing buyer would pay less than full market value for the property as if free from encumbrance. The argument that improvements merged with the land did not justify ignoring the contractual and proprietary constraints, and section 51 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 did not support valuation at full market value. The lower valuation accepted by the first appellate authority was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68955</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>