<?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>2006 (1) TMI 100 - MADRAS High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9827</link>
    <description>Immovable property burdened by urban land ceiling restrictions must be valued for wealth-tax by reference to the real, restricted nature of the asset. The statutory limits on transfer and enjoyment depress market value and cannot be ignored in valuation. Accordingly, where the land is subject to the Urban Land Ceiling Act, its value may properly be linked to the compensation payable under that ceiling law rather than an unrestricted market rate. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=48849" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 100 - MADRAS High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9827</link>
      <description>Immovable property burdened by urban land ceiling restrictions must be valued for wealth-tax by reference to the real, restricted nature of the asset. The statutory limits on transfer and enjoyment depress market value and cannot be ignored in valuation. Accordingly, where the land is subject to the Urban Land Ceiling Act, its value may properly be linked to the compensation payable under that ceiling law rather than an unrestricted market rate. The issue was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=9827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>