2003 (1) TMI 35 - HC - Wealth-tax

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment under section 17(1)(a) was valid in law? - The original assessment of the assessee who is an individual was re opened under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act 1957 on the ground that in the net wealth earlier assessed the wealth of Rs. 20, 500 escaped assessment. - we answer the above question in the affirmative i.e. against the assessee and in favour of the Department.

Summary

Issues:
Reopening of assessment under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.

Analysis:
The dispute in the present case pertains to the reopening of the assessment for the assessment years 1969-70 and 1971-72 under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The original assessment of the assessee, an individual, was reopened on the grounds that wealth amounting to Rs. 20,500 had escaped assessment. The assessee had taken a loan from the Life Insurance Corporation, secured against a life policy, and claimed exemption on this amount in the wealth-tax return. However, the Wealth-tax Officer reopened the assessment and added the loan amount to the net wealth of the assessee, leading to an appeal by the assessee against this reassessment.

The Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax set aside the reassessment orders, stating that it was not a case of non-disclosure of material facts, rendering the notice under section 17(1)(a) invalid. Subsequently, the Department filed appeals before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which allowed the appeals, leading to the reference of the question to the High Court by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the mere mention of the loan amount from the Life Insurance Corporation did not constitute a full disclosure as it did not specify that the loan was secured against the life policy of the assessee, which was exempt from wealth-tax.

The Tribunal's decision was supported by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sri Krishna Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [1996] 221 ITR 538, emphasizing the requirement of a full and true disclosure of all material facts necessary for assessment. The Tribunal specifically noted that the loan was secured against the exempt life policy of the assessee, which was not disclosed in the wealth-tax return. As per the conditions outlined in section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, the reassessment notice was deemed fully justified, as it was established that there was a non-disclosure of material facts necessary for the assessment of the net wealth of the assessee.

Therefore, the High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal, ruling in favor of the Department and against the assessee, affirming the validity of the reopening of the assessment under section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.