<?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>1984 (10) TMI 118 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69968</link>
    <description>For a co-owner, the monetary threshold for a compulsory valuation reference under section 16A is tested against the value of the assessee&#039;s undivided share, not the value of the entire property, although the whole property may inform the share valuation with suitable adjustments. On that basis, the threshold was not crossed for the first two years. In valuing an old commercial theatre held on a long lease, income yield was a relevant factor, and the absence of any realistic prospect of higher income did not support an upward revision. The earlier valuation was treated as the proper value, and the proposed enhancement was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:24:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=108321" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (10) TMI 118 - ITAT MADRAS-C</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69968</link>
      <description>For a co-owner, the monetary threshold for a compulsory valuation reference under section 16A is tested against the value of the assessee&#039;s undivided share, not the value of the entire property, although the whole property may inform the share valuation with suitable adjustments. On that basis, the threshold was not crossed for the first two years. In valuing an old commercial theatre held on a long lease, income yield was a relevant factor, and the absence of any realistic prospect of higher income did not support an upward revision. The earlier valuation was treated as the proper value, and the proposed enhancement was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69968</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>