SURESH SHENOY A S Vs. WEALTH TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an assessee to wealth-tax. He is a partner in two firms, namely, M/s. New Guna Shenoy Co. and Sasidhara Shenoy & Bros. For five years, 1978-79 to 1982-83, the 1st respondent, WTO, A-Ward, Ernakulam, referred the question of valuation of the petitioner's properties to the 2nd respondent, Valuation Officer, to assess the net wealth of the petitioner. THE 2nd respondent requested the petitioner to furnish certain details as per notice dated December 20, 1982 (Ext..P-1). THE petitioner filed objections before the 2nd respondent, Ext. P-2, dated March 2, 1983, and Ext. P-3 dated March 15, 1983. THE Valuation Officer effected a preliminary valuation report dated February 28 (Exts. P-4 and P-4(a)) which was served on the petitioner on March 1, 1983. THE petitioner was directed to file his objection to the estimate of valuation on or before March 10, 1983, as is seen from para. 7 at p. 43 of the counter-affidavit of the 2nd respondent. THE petitioner took time. Time was granted up to March 25, 1983. In the meanwhile, by notice dated March 19, 1983, evidenced by Ext. P-5, the Valuation Officer replied to the petitioner stating his views regarding the objections raised by the petitioner in Ext. P-2 and Ext. P-3. THE petitioner filed his objections, Ext. P-6, on March 21, 1983. THE 2nd respondent passed the final valuation report evidenced by Exts. R-2(a), and Exts. R-2(b), R-2(A) and R-2(B) on March 21, 1983, itself and later communicated the same to the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the petitioner filed this O.P. on March 18, 1983, praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash Ext. P-1 notice dated December 20, 1982, and also the provisional valuation report, Exts. P-4 and P-4A. Notice was ordered in the O.P. on March 21, 1983, When the O.P. was pending in this court, the final valuation report was effected by the 2nd respondent evidenced by Exts. R-2(A) and R-2(B) dated March 21, 1983. THE petitioner has filed a petition, C.M.P. No. 16023 of 1983, praying to quash Exts. R-2(A) & (B) also. This O.P. was heard along with connected O.P. No, 2344 of 1983 and other oases. Exts. P-5 and P-6 have been produced therein.

(2.) THIS court passed an order in C.M.P. No. 11165 of 1983 and other connected petitions on May 11, 1983, to the following effect:

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides, it turned out that the matter can be disposed of on point No. (2) urged by the petitioner. It is common ground that the petitioner filed Ex. P-6 objections on March 21, 1983. In the final valuation report (Exs. R-2 (A) and (B)), the above objections have no doubt been adverted to. Along with Ex. P-6, the petitioner filed an annexes ure wherein details of five sales, which have taken place nearabout the properties which are to be valued, are furnished. The extent of the properties, survey number, document number; its location, and the consideration mentioned are all mentioned. Four of them are sale deeds by private parties. One of them is the award passed in land acquisition proceedings dated June 11, 1980 (See pp. 18 and 19 of the 2nd respondent's counter-affidavit). The 2nd respondent has dismissed the objection in the following way in para. 8.3.3. (see p. 20 of the 2nd respondent's counter-affidavit):