<?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>2014 (7) TMI 1402 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467859</link>
    <description>In stamp valuation matters, the Ready Reckoner operates as a guideline and does not bind revenue authorities where the property&#039;s location and commercial character justify a different market value. The authority was entitled to treat the property as part of the Phoenix Mills Compound, apply Value Zone 12/91G instead of Value Zone 12/91, and revise the earlier adjudication to correct short levy of stamp duty. The later corrigendum was accepted as a correction of the zone description, and the procedure adopted for computing deficit duty was found lawful. The challenge failed and the revised valuation and recovery of deficit stamp duty were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 11:15:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895436" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 1402 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467859</link>
      <description>In stamp valuation matters, the Ready Reckoner operates as a guideline and does not bind revenue authorities where the property&#039;s location and commercial character justify a different market value. The authority was entitled to treat the property as part of the Phoenix Mills Compound, apply Value Zone 12/91G instead of Value Zone 12/91, and revise the earlier adjudication to correct short levy of stamp duty. The later corrigendum was accepted as a correction of the zone description, and the procedure adopted for computing deficit duty was found lawful. The challenge failed and the revised valuation and recovery of deficit stamp duty were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467859</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>