Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Judges

    Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax v. Himalaya Trading Co.

    S. Ranganathan, J.:— These two applications raise the question of valuation of a property on Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. The Wealth-tax Officer valued the property on the assumption that a multi-storeyed structure could be put on it and flats built and disposed of at fabulous rent. On appeal, the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) rejected this method and instead applied the land and building method after taking into account the portion of the land which was of commercial nature and the land which could be used only for residential purpose.

    2. The Tribunal has confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals). The question regarding the method of valuation is purely a question of fact and the Tribunal has applied a well recognised method in this regard. Even assuming that the method outlined by the Wealth-tax Officer could be described as a reasonable method of valuation, the Tribunal's order decides which method is more suitable to the particular case and that was on appreciation of the facts. These applications, therefore, fail and are dismissed. No costs.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax v. Himalaya Trading Co.
    (Mar 3, 1987)