9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Interpretation of new valuation rules under the Wealth-tax Act - Application of new rules to pending cases - Retroactive effect of procedural rules Interpretation of new valuation rules under the Wealth-tax Act: The judgment pertains to a joint statement of case submitted by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding wealth-tax appeals for the assessment years 1980-81 to 1983-84. The central question was whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to value immovable properties in accordance with the new valuation rules introduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1989. The amendment replaced the previous method of determining asset value with a new provision in Schedule III. The Tribunal had remitted the valuation of immovable properties to the Wealth-tax Officer based on the new rules. The court analyzed the legislative intent behind the amendment and the applicability of the new rules to ongoing cases. Application of new rules to pending cases: The court considered the nature of the new valuation rules and their impact on pending cases. It was noted that section 7(1) of the Wealth-tax Act is a machinery section, and section 46(2) empowers the rule-making authority to determine the market value of assets. The court emphasized that the method or mode of determining market value can be considered procedural rather than substantive. Referring to previous judgments, the court held that each asset must be separately valued in accordance with the relevant rule. It was established that procedural rules can apply retrospectively to pending cases. The court's decision was influenced by earlier rulings and affirmed by the Supreme Court in a subsequent case. Retroactive effect of procedural rules: The court's decision was guided by the principle that laws governing the valuation of assets on the valuation date are part of procedural law and should apply to pending cases. The judgment emphasized that the introduction of new rules, even with an effective date, does not preclude their retrospective application if they are procedural in nature. Relying on established legal interpretations and precedents, the court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, affirming the applicability of the new valuation rules to the wealth-tax appeals in question. The judgment concluded with a decision in favor of the assessee, with no order as to costs.
|
