TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (3) TMI 82
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the location, type of construction, yield, maintenance etc. In addition, in respect of 245 shares in M/s Venkataraman and Co. Ltd., held by the deceased, the Asst. Controller determined the value at Rs. 56,105 by adopting the value per share at Rs. 229. The accountable person went in appeal before the Appellate CED, objection to the fixation of the value of the above two items, along with certain other matters. 3. As far as the value of the property in question was concerned the Appellate Controller confirmed the value of Rs. 1,37,825 adopted by the Asstt. Controller. As regards the value of the shares K.S. Venkataraman & Co. Ltd., the Appellate Controller found that the value admitted by the accountable person was Rs. 24,500, which was e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fixed by the Collector after the property had been inspected by the Asstt. Engineer, P.W.D. this value ought to prevail. He, therefore, confirmed the value adopted by the Asst. Controller, in preference to the value stated to have been adopted by the AAC in the wealth-tax proceedings. 5. We are of the view that the assessee's contention that the value taken at the time of probate which was long after the death of the deceased should not be guiding factor and that the value nearer to the date of death or the valuation date should be the guiding factor has considerable force. Further there is a reference also to the valuation of the superstructure having put up after the death of the deceased. We are, therefore, convinced that the value nea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... duty also. The rule can be looked into for the purposes of knowing the manner of break-up method of valuation which is one of the recognized methods of valuation........Since under both the Acts, it is the price the shares would fetch if sold in the open market that has to be determined, the method of valuation or principles of valuation under both the Acts ought to be the same." 8. However, one interesting question raised by the Department is whether the Appellate Controller was correct in fixing the value per share at Rs. 125.69 when the accountable person himself has valued the said shares at Rs. 150 per share. One of the contentions of the Department Representatives was that when the assessee cannot have any grievance over the value r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 'aggrieved'. On going through the said order we find that the facts in that case were different, in that the assessee therein wanted a gift tax assessment whereas the Department found that there was no valid gift made and, therefore, no assessment could be made. It was in that context that the Tribunal analysed the entire s.22(1) of the GTO and found that none of the clauses would fit in that case. But here, on the other hand, the assessee is objecting to the value itself for which appeal are provided in cl. 62(1)(i) which states that any person objecting to any valuation made by the Controller may appeal to the Appellate Controller. It looks to us that the assessee could object to a valuation even though it is in accordance with the val....