<?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>1967 (2) TMI 97 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168819</link>
    <description>Property tax on lands and buildings must be assessed by a recognised valuation method tied to annual letting value, not by a uniform floor-area rate that ignores relevant factors such as age, location, construction and condition. A flat-rate method applied indiscriminately was therefore invalid, and the assessment entries based on it could not stand. The text also states that plant and machinery could not be brought within the tax by deeming provisions or a rule giving the Commissioner unguided power to specify classes of plant and machinery, because the taxing entry covered only lands and buildings. The inclusion of plant and machinery and the related rule were accordingly invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2015 12:49:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379995" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (2) TMI 97 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168819</link>
      <description>Property tax on lands and buildings must be assessed by a recognised valuation method tied to annual letting value, not by a uniform floor-area rate that ignores relevant factors such as age, location, construction and condition. A flat-rate method applied indiscriminately was therefore invalid, and the assessment entries based on it could not stand. The text also states that plant and machinery could not be brought within the tax by deeming provisions or a rule giving the Commissioner unguided power to specify classes of plant and machinery, because the taxing entry covered only lands and buildings. The inclusion of plant and machinery and the related rule were accordingly invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168819</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>