Madhya Pradesh Court May 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Gayatri Devi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-05-2004
Reported in: (2004)192CTR(MP)421; [2004]270ITR60(MP)
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is a reference made at the instance of the Revenue under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, 'for answering the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) holding that the value of the land should not be added while valuing the property on the rent capitalisation method ?' 2. The question arises out of the assessment year 1986-87. In short and in substance, the question arose before the assessing authority (wealth-tax) as to what should be the mode of valuation for determining the immovable properties of the assessee. This question arose while valuing the property which was in possession of the tenants of the assessee. The Valuation Officer, while making the valuation, applied the method of rent capitalisation and further proceeded to add the value of the land on which the property was constructed. It is against this method...
Dhaula and ors. Vs. Muzammil HussaIn and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT308
ORDERS.K. Pande, J. 1. This revision under Section 115, CPC is directed against the order dated 5-12-03, passed by Civil Judge Class 1, Raisen in Execution Case No. 61 -A/74-94.2. Plaintiff/respondent-decree holder instituted C.S. No. 61-A/76 against the defendant/petitioners and others seeking declaration of title, restoration of possession of suit lands and recovery of mesne profit. The suit aforesaid has been resisted. However, vide judgment dated 10-10-1977, it was decreed against defendant Nos. 8 and 9 directing them to restore possession of suit lands to the plaintiff/respondents. The suit against defendant Nos. 1 to 7 was dismissed. Being aggrieved, plaintiff/respondent preferred C.A. No. 10-A/88 before the District Judge, Bhopal. The appeal has been dismissed vide judgment dated 22-8-91. On 27-9-94, plaintiff/respondents-decree holder put the decree passed by Civil Judge in C.S. No. 61-A/76 into execution claiming possession of suit lands against defendant Nos. 8 and 9. Defenda...