<?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>1981 (8) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29004</link>
    <description>Municipal valuation of a factory building under section 174 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959 must be based on the present cost of erecting a comparable building, with depreciation allowed according to the building&#039;s actual condition and the value of appurtenant land added. The authorities erred by not properly assessing the structure&#039;s condition and by applying income-tax depreciation concepts, which are not the statutory basis for municipal valuation. Additional evidence produced at the first appellate stage could be considered because it was already on the record when the second appeal was heard. The valuation orders were quashed and the matter remitted for fresh assessment under the correct method.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:31:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68001" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (8) TMI 22 - ALLAHABAD High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29004</link>
      <description>Municipal valuation of a factory building under section 174 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959 must be based on the present cost of erecting a comparable building, with depreciation allowed according to the building&#039;s actual condition and the value of appurtenant land added. The authorities erred by not properly assessing the structure&#039;s condition and by applying income-tax depreciation concepts, which are not the statutory basis for municipal valuation. Additional evidence produced at the first appellate stage could be considered because it was already on the record when the second appeal was heard. The valuation orders were quashed and the matter remitted for fresh assessment under the correct method.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>