TMI Blog1991 (7) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Wealth-tax Officer on the basis of the Board's Circular No. 357 dated March 26, 1983? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Assessing Officer to accept the valuation of shares of the assessee in the coffee estate as shown by the assessee on the basis of the report of a registered valuer?" The facts relating to the first question are that the assessee had shares of the following companies 1. Birla Bros. Pvt. Ltd., 2. Hyderabad Agencies Pvt. Ltd., 3. Kores India Ltd., 4. Birla Consultants Ltd., 5. Jayant Investment Corporation Pvt. Ltd., and 6. Central India General Agents Ltd. The said shares are unquoted. The Wealth-tax Officer valued the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals ) and contended that the Wealth-tax Officer should have accepted the value of tea estates as shown in the valuation reports. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) examined the valuation reports as also the value taken by the Wealth-tax Officer. He was of the view that, in view of the difference in valuation of the agricultural assets of Billigiri Rangan Estate, the Wealth-tax Officer should have referred the matter of valuation to the Departmental Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act. He, therefore, set aside the assessment and directed the Wealth-tax Officer to refer the matter of valuation of unquoted shares other than shares of Messrs. Birla Brothers Pvt. Ltd. and agric ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... companies is covered by the decision of the Tribunal (Special Bench) in W. T. A. No. 478/(Cal) of 1987 and W. T. A. No. 440/(Cal) of 1987, wherein it has been held that rule 1D is not mandatory, and it was directed that the shares should be valued on the yield method. Consequently, the Assessing Officer is directed to value the shares of private limited companies by applying the yield method and the valuation shown by the assessee on the basis of the registered valuer's report, should not be accepted. So far as the assessee's share in the coffee estate is concerned, the same has been accepted by the Tribunal in the case of K. K. Birla (HUF) for the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82. Following the said orders of the Tribunal, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Direct Taxes is binding on the revenue authorities but they are not binding on the Tribunal or on the assessee. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Revenue justified the action of the lower authority. We have considered the rival contentions. The circular which has been referred to by the Tribunal is as follows : "Circular No. 357, dated March 26, 1983 Subject : Valuation of agricultural land comprised in tea, coffee, rubber and cardamom plantations Guidelines regarding. Attention is invited to the Board's Circular No. 326 dated February 6, 1982, issued from file No. 319/15/80-WT on the above subject. In view of various practical difficulties in implementing this circular, the Board makes the following broad guidelines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch virgin lands may be negligible. 5. Regarding the stock of coffee, value of the same may be separately determined on the basis of the average of the preceding three years' dividends and added to the value of the land. 6. With regard to the other assets, such as land utilised for constructing roads, paths, farm houses, store houses, yards, buildings for processing, building for housing the coolies and the supervisory staff, etc., no separate addition need be made. 7. Pending wealth-tax assessments involving valuation of coffee plantations may be finalised on the above basis. (Sd.) (P. Ranganathan) Under Secretary, C. B. D. T. (F. No. 319/9/83-WT). " According to the submission of Mr. Bajoria, valuation cannot equated with tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) did not have any jurisdiction to ask the Wealth-tax Officer to refer the matter of valuation to the Valuation Officer. In Raja Baldeodas Birla Santatikosh, v. CWT [1991] 189 ITR 613, a Division Bench of this court considered this aspect of the matter. It was held that the appeal was a continuation of the original proceedings. The bar of limitation is on the Wealth-tax Officer's power to make an assessment. It will be applicable only to the initial order to be made by him and not to an order that would be made by him pursuant to a direction from the appellate authority. Accordingly, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals ) was competent to give the direction as he did. So far as the question regar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
