Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1989 (6) TMI 21

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , the trust under the deed of settlement dated March 22, 1954, came to an end and the petitioner ceased to be a trustee in respect of the properties of the trust. On and from March 1, 1965, Smt. Radha Devi Rajgharia took over charge of the said trust properties as full owner thereof and as her own estate. Since March 1, 1965, the petitioner and/or any other erstwhile trustees under the said settlement were not and are not the owners and hence not assessees or representative assessees within the meaning of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of the said properties. It is further alleged that by two separate orders of assessment both dated April 23, 1976, made under section 16(3) of the said Act, respondent No. 2, Wealth-tax Officer, "C"-War .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at inasmuch as the valuation was made by the said respondent No. 2 in conformity with the well recognised method of valuation and was made bona fide and is not perverse and there are no conditions, facts and materials on the basis whereof it could be said that the said valuation and assessments thereon were erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue and, therefore, respondent No. 1 is acting and proceeding illegally and without jurisdiction. Dr. Pal, learned advocate for the writ petitioner, has strongly argued that the petitioner is challenging the notice issued under section 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax. The duty assessed in respect of the assessment years for 1964-65 and 1965-66 in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f the asset as returned is in accordance with the estimate made by a registered valuer, if the Wealth-tax Officer is of the opinion that the value so returned, is less than its fair market value; (b) in any other case, if the Wealth-tax Officer is of the opinion (i) that the fair market value of the asset exceeds the value of the asset as returned by more than such percentage of the value of the asset as returned or by more than such amount as may be prescribed in this behalf ; or (ii) that having regard to the nature of the asset and other relevant circumstances, it is necessary so to do." Dr. Pal, learned advocate for the petitioner, contended that the Valuation Officer as referred to under section 16A read with section 12A of the W .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sset has been assessed by a registered valuer, a reference may be made to the Valuation Officer if the Wealth-tax Officer considers that the estimate made by the registered valuer requires an upward revision, i.e., where the value returned, after estimation by a registered valuer, is less than its market value. It was held that a reference under section 16A as aforesaid, on the language of the section, could be made only in respect, of and for the purposes of making and completing a pending assessment under the Act or only in respect of the assessment year for which the assessment is pending. Similarly, in Satyendra Chunder Ghose v. WTO [1980] 126 ITR 102 (Cal), Bimal Chandra Basak J. has been pleased to hold that the words used in sectio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... support of his return and thereafter the Wealth-tax Officer received a valuation report prepared by the Executive Engineer (Valuation) of the Department that the properties concerned were not properly valued by the petitioner and issued notice under section l7(1)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act with a view to reopening the earlier assessments, the court, upon consideration of the points of law, quashed the notice on the condition and finding that the mere fact of two valuers giving conflicting reports was not sufficient for the Wealth-tax Officer to reopen the assessment. Learned advocates, Mr. Moitra with Mr. Prosad, for the respondent's authorities have argued that the valuation report is a question of fact and cannot be questioned and the wr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates