2004 (3) TMI 28 - HC - Wealth-tax

Validity of the notice u/s 17 - it is not disputed that the Assessing Officer had duly recorded reasons about the escapement of income - The proviso to sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Act provides that before issuing any notice under this section the Assessing Officer shall record his reasons for doing so. Thus the only requirement is that the reasons have to be recorded before issuing notice under section 17 of the Act. In the present case this requirement stands duly complied with. We are therefore satisfied that the Tribunal was justified in upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings.

Summary

Issues: Validity of reassessment proceedings under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.

Analysis:
The judgment involves an appeal under section 27A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The case pertains to the reassessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1991-92 due to the under-valuation of immovable property. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 17 of the Act after finding that the taxable wealth had escaped assessment. The correct value of the property was determined to be Rs. 26,92,125, as opposed to the declared value of Rs. 15,23,375. The reassessment was completed by adding the amount of Rs. 11,68,750 representing the difference in property value. The appellant challenged the validity of the reassessment proceedings under section 17 of the Act, contending that all relevant facts were disclosed in the original return, and the Assessing Officer erred in drawing correct inferences. Additionally, it was argued that the notice issued on March 4, 1994, was invalid as the earlier notice dated July 22, 1993, was still pending, and proper reasons were not recorded before issuing the notice.

The court found no merit in the appellant's contentions. It was established that the immovable property's value was incorrectly calculated, leading to an escapement of wealth. The appellant had not made a full disclosure of material facts necessary for assessment, specifically regarding the net maintainable rent of the property. The court also dismissed objections regarding the validity of the notice issued on March 4, 1994, under section 17 of the Act. The earlier notice from July 22, 1993, was deemed invalid as it lacked approval from the higher authority, rendering the subsequent notice valid. The court emphasized that the reasons for reassessment were duly recorded before issuing the notice, as required by law. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision upholding the validity of the reassessment proceedings was deemed justified.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit, affirming the validity of the reassessment proceedings under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.