9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (3) TMI 129X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad, Jaipur. For the asst. yr. 1971-72, the valuation date for which is 31st March, 1971, the assessee disclosed the value of the said property at Rs. 80,768. The WTO determined the value of the property at Rs. 1,00,000 (Rs. 60,000 for the house property and Rs. 40,000 for the open plot of land). For the asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1976-77, the value shown by the assessee and the value determined by the WTO, are as follows: Assessment Year Value shown in the returns Value determined by the WTO 1972-73 3,77,963 4,90,000 1973-74 3,97,419 4,90,000 1974-75 No return was filed 4,40,000 1975-76 4,11,000 4,90,000 1976-77 4,1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in all cases of wealth-tax, where the assessee has shown the valuation of any individual property at Rs. 3,00,000 or more, then irrespective of whether the valuation is or is not supported by certificate from an Approved Valuer, the case should, as a matter of course, be referred to the Valuation Cell. According to the CWT, the error on the part of the WTO is that he failed to make reference to the Valuation Cell in the light of the said instruction of the CBDT. A perusal of s. 25(2) clearly shows that the order of the WTO should not only be erroneous, but that should also be prejudicial to the interests of revenue. These conditions are to be established concomitantly and not alternatively. The WTO having failed to make reference to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot binding on the WTO. The latter being a superior authority, is fully competent not to accept the report of the former. Thus, this is also not the error within the meaning of s. 25(2) on the basis of which it can be said that the order of the WTO is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 5. The least and the third error, according to the CWT, is that while computing the market value of the property, the WTO illegally deducted interest from the net income from the property. The CWT found in para 3 as follows: "It is further found that while computing the market value of the property the WTO has deducted interest also from the net income from the said property and also the borrowings, which is patently wrong. It may be added that in inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave no hesitation in upholding the order of the CWT pertaining to the asst. yr. 1971-72. 8. The revert back to the cases pertaining to the asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1976-77, we find that only two errors have been pointed out by the CWT, namely, that the WTO failed to make reference to the Valuation Cell and that he failed to consider the report of the Inspector, which was available on record. No other error has been pointed out for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 to 1976-77. We have already considered such error while dealing with the case pertaining to the asst. yr. 1971-72. The view taken by us is that failure on the part of the WTO in making reference to the Valuation Cell may constitute an error, but it cannot be said that the order of the WTO is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
