9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (1) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uation of the shares belonging to the assessee in Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Ltd. The WTO had found that the assessee had declared the value of the shares at Rs. 7.90. He however, valued these shares at Rs. 11.60 per share. 2. When the matter come before the AAC, it was found that the shares of Mahalakshmi Sugar Mills Ltd. were not quoted on the Stock Exchange. It was also found that this company had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue of the shares should be taken under r. 1D of the WT Rules. The assessee has challenged the order of the AAC and besides relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CGT vs. Kusum Ben D. Mahadevia (1980) 14 CTR (SC) 366 : (1980) 122 ITR 38 (SC) and (1980) 14 CTR (Bom) 20 : (1980) 124 ITR 799 (Bom), he relied on the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Sharbati Dev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the earlier year the Tribunal had directed that the shares should be valued having regard to the directions given by the Delhi High Court in the case of Smt. Sharbati Devi Jhalani vs. CWT (1986) 15 CTR (Del) 85 : (1986) 159 ITR 549 (Del). 3. Having heard the parties, we are of the view that the ld. AAC has not taken into consideration the decision of the Delhi High Court. It is admitted posit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
