9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Valuation of property for probate, disagreement on valuation method, application of Wealth Tax Act and Estate Duty Act, interpretation of rules for valuation.
In the judgment by BHARUCHA J. of the High Court BOMBAY, the petitioner filed a petition for probate of his father's will, including a property valuation issue. The property in question was undervalued according to the Collector and Superintendent of Stamps, who suggested a higher valuation based on the land-plus-building method. The petitioner's counsel argued for a decision on the valuation method before proceeding with the enquiry under s. 28(5) of the Bombay Court Fees Act, 1959. The property consisted of a bungalow with unutilised surplus land, and the valuation method was a point of contention. The judgment delves into the valuation principles of the Wealth Tax Act (W.T. Act) and the Estate Duty Act (E.D. Act) concerning the estimation of asset value during a person's lifetime and at the time of death, respectively. It highlights the importance of following the same valuation method for both acts, emphasizing the basis of valuations under these laws. The judgment references specific rules u/s 40 of the W.T. Act, particularly r. IBB of the W.T. Rules, 1957, which provide a method for valuing residential properties. The absence of similar rules under the E.D. Act is noted. The judgment draws parallels between the valuation methods prescribed by the W.T. Rules and the applicable principles for estate duty valuation. It cites a Division Bench judgment supporting the use of recognized valuation methods in the absence of specific rules. The petitioner's counsel argued for the application of the land and building method due to the property's characteristics, while the Superintendent of Stamps advocated for a different approach based on the property's lack of rental income and surplus land. The judgment discusses the necessity of determining the property's value for probate purposes in line with the principles laid down in the W.T. Rules, 1957, under the Wealth Tax Act. It clarifies that this approach may not apply if the property has unutilised surplus land exceeding a specified percentage of the total area. The parties agreed to certain conditions regarding the valuation method, leading to a referral of the matter for an enquiry under the Bombay Court Fees Act, incorporating the principles discussed in the judgment.
|
