SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 1108

RUMA PAL, S.P.BHARUCHA, M.B.SHAH
Gaj Singh – Appellant
Versus
Settlement Commissioner – Respondent


(1) UNDER challenge before us is an order passed by the Settlement Commission in respect of the assessee appellant, Gaj Singh, the erstwhile Maharaja of Jodhpur. Leave was granted restricted to the following three questions:

"1) Whether the immovable properties referred to in para 7 of the Settlement Commissions order should be valued under Rule I BB even for assessment years prior to 1979-1980; 2) Whether the value of the Sardar Samand Palace is exempt from Wealth Tax under Section 5(1)(iv)or(ivb) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957; 3) Whether the value of the Jodhpur Fort is exempt under Section 5(1 )(xii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957;

(2) IT is not in dispute that the first question must be answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee,being covered by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Wealth Tax v. Sharvan Kumar Swarup & Son [JT 1994 (6) SC 446].

(3) AS to the second question, Section 5 of the Wealth Tax Act states that "wealth- tax shall not be payable by an assessee in respect of the following assets, and such assets shall not be included in the net wealth of the assessee.........(iv) one house or part of a house belonging to the a






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top