9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Interpretation of taxable net wealth under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 regarding a refund received from the Coffee Board. Analysis: The judgment delivered by the High Court of MADRAS involved a tax case reference under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 for the assessment year 1990-91. The primary question raised was whether an amount of Rs. 43,25,266 received by the assessee from the Coffee Board, being a refund of sales tax, should be considered as part of the taxable net wealth. The assessee argued that since the amount might have to be returned to the government if the decision favored the Coffee Board, it should not be included in the wealth. However, the Assessing Authority disagreed and included the sum in the wealth. Upon appeal, the Commissioner rejected the assessee's claim, stating that the amount remained with the assessee and hence should be part of the wealth. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, leading to the reference to the High Court. The counsel for the assessee contended that the amount was held in trust, and the property would only become absolute upon revocation of the undertaking to refund the sum in case of an adverse decision against the Coffee Board. The Revenue's counsel supported the Tribunal's decision, highlighting the indemnity provided by the assessee to the Coffee Board. The Court agreed with the Revenue's submission, emphasizing that the liability on the amount received had been confirmed by the Tribunal in relation to the Income-tax Act proceedings. The Tribunal noted that no action had been taken by the tax authorities to confirm the liability on the Coffee Board, and the issue was settled by the Supreme Court. The Court found no merit in the assessee's argument to interfere with the Tribunal's order. It was observed that the character of the receipt would not change based on the undertaking to return the amount under certain conditions. Therefore, considering the treatment and acceptance by the assessee, the question was answered against the assessee, affirming that the amount received should be part of the taxable net wealth. No costs were awarded in this judgment.
|
