COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. CHANDRAKALA LAL
LAWS(CAL)-1976-12-3
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 07,1976

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX Appellant
VERSUS
CHANDRAKALA LAL Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX V. HINDUSTAN MOTORS LTD. [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX VS. MAHADEO JALAN AND MAHABIR PRASAD JALANE TC [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CENTRAL VS. MOHAN LAL NOPANY [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX CENTRAL VS. BALBHADRADAS BANGUR [LAWS(CAL)-1982-4-6] [REFERRED TO]
WEALTH-TAX OFFICER VS. RAMLAL RAJGARHIA AND RAMLAL RAJGARHIA SONS [LAWS(CAL)-1984-6-32] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

Deb, J. - (1.)The following question is involved in this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ;
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the conclusion of the Tribunal that the break-up value of the shares of Messrs. Lal Holdings (P.) Ltd. should be determined on the basis of its balance-sheet figures was in accordance with law ?"

(2.)The reference relates to the wealth-tax assessment years 1963-64 and 1964-65, for which the respective valuation dates are March 31, 1963, and March 31, 1964. The assessee held certain shares in two private limited companies, namely, M/s. S. Lal & Co. (P.) Ltd. and M/s. Lal Holdings (P.) Ltd. Messrs. Lal Holdings (P.) Ltd. held certain shares in Messrs. S. Lal & Co. (P.) Ltd. The shares held by the assessee in these two companies were valued by the Wealth-tax Officer by adopting the break-up method of valuation of assets and not on the basis of book value of those shares. The appellate authorities had set aside the said valuation by holding that though the break-up method of valuation was permissible in the case of these two companies, it was not applicable in the case of an assessee- shareholder and the shares held by Messrs. S. Lal & Co. (P.) Ltd. in Messrs. Lal Holdings (P.) Ltd. should be valued on the basis of their book value as shown in the balance-sheet of the former company without any such adjustment and dismissed the appeals filed by the department. '
(3.)Mr. B. L. Pal, learned counsel for the revenue, has questioned the validity of the above reasonings and has urged that the break-up method of valuation of assets has been accepted by the Tribunal and, therefore, if it is held that this method is not applicable in the case of the assessee, it would lead to an anomalous position.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.