https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55953 Revision under section 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act was not justified where the assessments were made on the basis of the return and valuation material furnished by the assessee. The later compensation paid by the Government for acquired land did not by itself establish undervaluation, because the land was affected by disputed possession, adverse claims, title uncertainty and the absence of a normal market. For valuation under section 7(1), the governing test is fair market value in a hypothetical open market with a willing buyer, and the subsequent compensation figure, shaped by special circumstances, could not replace that test on the relevant valuation dates. The assessee's valuation was upheld and the assessments were restored. en-us Wed, 13 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Nov 2010 17:53:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55953 Revision under section 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act was not justified where the assessments were made on the basis of the return and valuation material furnished by the assessee. The later compensation paid by the Government for acquired land did not by itself establish undervaluation, because the land was affected by disputed possession, adverse claims, title uncertainty and the absence of a normal market. For valuation under section 7(1), the governing test is fair market value in a hypothetical open market with a willing buyer, and the subsequent compensation figure, shaped by special circumstances, could not replace that test on the relevant valuation dates. The assessee's valuation was upheld and the assessments were restored. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Wed, 13 Dec 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55953