2011 (7) TMI 1144 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against Wealth Tax assessment - Exclusion category of motor cars u/s 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act, 1957, Validity of wealth tax levy, Assessment of chargeable wealth, Service of notice for ex parte assessment.

Summary:

Issue 1: The appellant claimed exclusion from wealth tax levy based on the definition of motor cars u/s 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied the claim, holding the appellant liable for wealth tax. The appellant contended that vehicles were used for leasing business and fell under exclusion categories. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order. The appellant appealed to the ITAT.

Issue 2: The appellant disputed the assessment of chargeable wealth at a specific amount, arguing that it should not be liable for wealth tax. The CIT(A) confirmed the assessment, leading to the appellant's appeal before the ITAT.

Issue 3: The appellant raised concerns about the validity of the assessment due to the lack of proper notice before an ex parte assessment. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's order despite the notice issue, prompting the appellant to appeal to the ITAT.

In the case, the appellant, a private limited company engaged in leasing vehicles, contested the imposition of wealth tax. The company asserted that its vehicles used for leasing were excluded from wealth tax as per the Act. Despite filing a return declaring nil taxable wealth, the assessment by the WTO valued the total wealth at a specific amount, denying the exclusion claim. The appellant's arguments citing relevant case laws were considered but not accepted by the CIT(A), leading to the current appeal.

During the ITAT proceedings, the appellant's representative emphasized the usage of vehicles for leasing purposes, supported by legal precedents. The respondent argued against the appellant's interpretation of hiring vehicles, advocating for upholding the CIT(A)'s decision.

After reviewing the submissions and evidence, the ITAT found ambiguity regarding the actual usage of vehicles for hiring purposes. As the appellant failed to provide conclusive evidence, the matter was remitted to the WTO for a detailed examination of lease agreements to determine if vehicles were hired out as per the Wealth Tax Act. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

The judgment was pronounced on 22/7/11 by A.M. Alankamony, Accountant Member of ITAT Ahmedabad.