1987 (1) TMI 151

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1974-75. The common grounds in these two appeals relate to the question of valuation of the shares belonging to the assessee in Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Ltd. The WTO had found that the assessee had declared the value of the shares at Rs. 7.90. He however, valued these shares at Rs. 11.60 per share. 2. When the matter come before the AAC, it was found that the shares of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Ltd.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cision of the Allahabad High Court was applicable. The AAC directed that the value of the shares should be taken under r. 1D of the WT Rules. The assessee has challenged the order of the AAC and besides relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CGT vs. Kusum Ben D. Mahadevia (1980) 14 CTR (SC) 366 : (1980) 122 ITR 38 (SC) and (1980) 14 CTR (Bom) 20 : (1980) 124 ITR 799 (Bom), he ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se of the assessee. It was further submitted that in the case of the assessee for the earlier year the Tribunal had directed that the shares should be valued having regard to the directions given by the Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Sharbati Devi Jhalani vs. CWT (1986) 15 CTR (Del) 85 : (1986) 159 ITR 549 (Del). 3. Having heard the parties, we are of the view that the ld. AAC has not tak....