1987 (5) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppeals, the controversy relates to the value of immovable property situated at 86/11, Kalpi Road, Kanpur. The assessee had brought appeals before the AAC against the valuation determined by the WTO. The Valuation Officer was present at the time of hearing of the appeals before the AAC. He gave his working according to which the value came to Rs. 48 per sq. yd. in the month of Dec., 1976. The assessee's representative had agreed to that valuation. However, it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that the said valuation should remain fixed at least for a period of 3 years and the valuation officer had agreed to that proposition. In pursuance of such agreement, the value of the land in question was taken at Rs. 48 per sq. yd. For the asst. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0 per cent deduction may be allowed for joint ownership. On the other hand, the ld. Departmental Representative has contended that in an HUF, the principle of joint ownership cannot be applied inasmuch as the entire HUF owns the property and it is the wealth of the HUF which is being assessed. According to him, there is no co-owner in an HUF. He has further pointed out that the assessee had agreed to the rate of Rs. 48 per sq. yd. in the asst. yr. 1977-78 and as such it should have no grievance. 5. We have given our anxious consideration to the rival submissions. It would be appropriate to mention here that any observation by the Valuation Officer in the case of another assessee can be little assistance to the assessee in this case if the....