Rule 20 of Schedule III to the Wealth-tax Act

Last updated: 19 April 2008

Court :
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN

Brief :

Citation :
Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. GajSingh, Ex-Ruler of Jodhpur

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. GajSingh, Ex-Ruler of Jodhpur BHAGWATI PRASAD AND MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, JJ. TAX REFERENCE NOS. 7 OF 1999, 16 TO 22 AND 37 OF 2001 AND 10 OF 2004 September 21, 2007 Rule 20 of Schedule III to the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Valuation of assets - Others - Whether for purposes of valuation of properties of assessee, in absence of guidelines and principles specified by board by a general or special order in regard to those properties as required under rule 20(3), valuation as declared by assessee was to be adopted - Held, yes FACTS The Tribunal directed to adopt the value of agricultural land and public park land as declared by the assessee. In reference, the revenue argued that the Tribunal was not justified in law in doing so when there was a provision in Rule 20 of schedule III to the Act to value such properties. HELD A bare reading of rule 20(3) shows that it requires guidelines and principles to be specified by the Board for determination of the value of the properties. However, as admitted by the revenue, no such guidelines and principles had been issued, thus, in absence of guidelines and principles, determination of value of property cannot be made under rule 20(3). [Para 6] Therefore, in absence of guidelines and principles specified by the Board by a general or special order in regard to the properties in question, Tribunal was justified to adopt the value of agricultural land and public park as declared by the assessee. [Para 7]

Summarize this with AI

ChatGPT Perplexity Claude Google AI Grok