COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. TARABEN R PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE following question was referred under the provisions of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 :

(2.) THE assessee is an individual owning a theatre complex in Bangalore. Though, initially, in the wealth-tax returns, the assessee had shown the cost of construction of the property as noted in the books as part of her net wealth, subsequently she got the property valued by an approved valuer and the entire property was valued at Rs. 30 lakhs. However, the Valuation Officer to whom the matter was referred by the Wealth-tax Officer valued the property on the basis of land and building method and arrived at the value of Rs. 46 lakhs. THE Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that the entire property has been let out and, therefore, adopted the rental basis for valuation as an initial step and arrived at the value of Rs. 25 lakhs, and on the basis of land and building method, the value arrived at was Rs. 42.3 lakhs. In view of the vast disparity between the two values, he adopted the average method, i.e., by averaging the two valuations, following the decision of this court in Smt. S. Neelaveni v. CWT [1980] 125 ITR 665. THE Revenue questioned this before the Appellate Tribunal. THE Appellate Tribunal affirmed the aforesaid order. Hence, these references.

(3.) THESE observations cannot be ignored on the ground that the observations were not necessary for the purpose of the said case. The principle involved had to be stated though, having regard to the facts of the said case, there was no occasion to apply the particular observation. Even otherwise, we are of the view that the view expressed by this court is quite reasonable and we do not find any reason to depart from the earlier view. For the reasons stated above, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue.