TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1980 (5) TMI 73
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the value shown at Rs. 9,20,640 by the assessee. 2. The dispute relates to the valuation of the jewellery in this appeal. The assessee was in possession of jewellery weighing 17,767 grams on the valuation date i.e., 31st March, 1976 relevant to the asst. yr. 1976-77. The assessee disclosed the value of such jewellery at Rs. 9,20,640. It is undisputed that the said jewellery is studded with preci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he WTO, it however, appears that the deduction to which the assessee is entitled on account of mixture was not allowed, as the labour charges were not added by the assessee. For this purpose, the counsel for the assessee relied on the valuer's report. It is categorically stated before us by the assessee's counsel that the approved valuer made the valuation itemwise. Shri Sogani frankly admits that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der of the WTO that labour charges were set off for the deduction which the assessee was entitled to on account of mixture. The final argument of Shri Sogani is that deduction on account of mixture which the assessee is entitled to, cannot be equal to the labour charges. He urges before us that whereas the labour charges are much smaller, the assessee would be entitled to much higher deduction at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 35,000, the deduction @ 15 per cent on account of mixture would far exceed this amount. It is for this reason, Shri Sogani argues that the WTO was not justified in giving the set off of labour charges for the deduction which the assessee is entitled to on account of mixture @15 per cent, according to the WTO. We find substance in the submission of Shri Sogani. In no case can the labour charge....