1967 (4) TMI 37 - HC - Income Tax

Gift Tax Act, 1958 - petitioner made a gift of a certain extent of land to his daughter and grandchildren - valuation for the land

Summary

Issues:
1. Valuation of a gift of land for gift-tax purposes.
2. Jurisdiction of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to pass a remand order.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner made a gift of land to his daughter and grandchildren, and the valuation of the gift was disputed by the tax authorities. The Gift-tax Officer initially valued the land at Rs. 1,200 per acre, while the Appellate Assistant Commissioner accepted the petitioner's valuation of Rs. 900 per acre. The matter was further appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which issued a remand order for additional evidence to be gathered on the valuation of the land. After considering the new evidence, the Tribunal determined the proper valuation to be Rs. 1,200 per acre, setting aside the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's decision.

2. The petitioner argued that the Tribunal's remand order exceeded its jurisdiction, contending that the Tribunal could only remand a matter after setting aside the impugned decision if relevant evidence had not been considered by the lower authorities. However, the Court held that the Tribunal's power to pass "such orders as it think fit" under section 23(5) of the Gift-tax Act was broad enough to include directing the lower authorities to collect fresh evidence and submit findings, even in an interim capacity, pending the final disposal of the appeal. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal had the authority to take additional evidence as necessary and direct lower authorities to do the same, as per the Appellate Tribunal Rules.

3. The petitioner also argued that there was insufficient data before the Tribunal to support the valuation of the land at Rs. 1,200 per acre. However, the Court noted that the Tribunal had considered various documents related to property sales in the area to arrive at the valuation, while rejecting the petitioner's evidence due to lack of proper documentation. The Court held that the Tribunal's decision on the valuation was a factual determination based on the evidence presented, and as such, could not be overturned on reference.

In conclusion, the Court found no grounds to question the Tribunal's decision and dismissed the petition, ordering the petitioner to pay the respondent's costs and counsel's fee.