https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23584 In valuing a lessor's interest in long-leased property for wealth-tax, the capitalised rental value could not be enhanced by a notional reversionary component, because that would amount to double valuation of the same tenanted property. A claimed right to receive a flat in a proposed building was also excluded, as it depended on uncertain contingencies and was not capable of present monetary quantification on the relevant valuation dates. Once those additions were removed, the valuation adopted by the Valuation Officer could not stand and the connected direction based on the same erroneous premise was set aside. en-us Fri, 20 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Dec 2009 13:11:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23584 In valuing a lessor's interest in long-leased property for wealth-tax, the capitalised rental value could not be enhanced by a notional reversionary component, because that would amount to double valuation of the same tenanted property. A claimed right to receive a flat in a proposed building was also excluded, as it depended on uncertain contingencies and was not capable of present monetary quantification on the relevant valuation dates. Once those additions were removed, the valuation adopted by the Valuation Officer could not stand and the connected direction based on the same erroneous premise was set aside. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Fri, 20 May 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=23584