TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (6) TMI 79
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Representative. The Judicial Member in dealing with the valuation of lands situated in Vannathurai, Adyar, Madras for Wealth-tax purposes for the asst. yr. 1971-72 to 1973-74, found that as the valuation officer has given his order estimating the value of the land under s. 16-A (5) of the WT Act and the assessee having disputed the valuation of the land before the AAC, the AAC should have followed the procedure laid down under s. 23(3A) of the WT Act. According to him, admittedly the AAC has not followed the said procedure. Therefore, following the decision in the case of K R. Ahmed Shah vs. WTO(1), the Judicial Member was of the view that the requirement under s. 23 (3A) was mandatory under the Act. Accordingly he was of the view that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....According to him, the requirements of s. 23(3A) would not mean to confer a right on the assessee appellant but it was a provision to enable the Department to place before the appellate authority the opinion of an expert. In view of the same, the difference of opinion has arisen and the question aforesaid has to be answered. 4. The assessee's counsel Mr. Ramamani argued before me that though the valuation officer's report has to be adopted by the WTO never the less the valuation officer is different from the WTO and he has got to act independently. He is in a way to protect the assessee's interest also by not giving such value as would be favourable to the Revenue. That being so, the Parliament in its wisdom has provided that he shall have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sidered as a witness. In that view of the matter, I agree with the view of the Accountant-Member in his order that his role is that of an expert. In the context of the same if I examine ss. 23(3A) (a) and 23(3A) (b), it is clear that particularly in the case of 23(3A) (b) the word "shall" will have to be given the mandatory meaning where once a request has been made by the WTO to give an opportunity of being heard to any valuation officer nominated for the purpose by the WTO, the AAC shall have to give it. The word "shall" thus for the purpose of s. 23(3A) (b) has to be understood as mandatory. This provision 23(3A)(b) is to apply to a case where valuation officer does not come into the picture because he has not made any valuation under s.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(b). In the case of State of Kerala vs. Alasserry Mohammed etc., (3) A their Lordships of the Supreme Court have referred to rules of interpretation to determine whether a particular provision is directory or mandatory. Their Lordships have observed at paras 7 and 8 as under: "In the eleventh edition of the well known treaties Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes are to be found at page 362 onwards certain guidelines laid down for determining whether a particular Statute or Statutory Rule is imperative or directory. "Where, indeed, the whole aim and object of the legislature would be plainly defeated if the command to do the thing in a particular manner did not imply a prohibition to do it in any other manner, no doubt can be entertai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... he is going to reduce the valuation from the valuation given in the valuer's report. That the need for requirement of being heard the valuation officer being heard would arise or not, cannot be judged by the AAC at the commencement of the hearing but only during the progress of the hearing and, therefore, the question would be whether the AAC should wait till an occasion arises to give a hearing to the valuer. In my opinion, the legislature's intention does not appear to be so. That is why a blanket provision has been introduced by covering cls. (a) and (b). An opportunity to the valuation officer of being heard may be utilised by the valuation officer both to justify his valuation as well as to present his point of view that neither an en....