9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of section 5(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 regarding exemption eligibility for assets held by a minor child. Analysis: The case involved a dispute over the exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under section 5(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in relation to a gift of Rs. 3 lakhs made by the assessee to his minor son. The Wealth-tax Officer initially allowed the exemption, but upon reassessment, disallowed it citing an amendment to the Act effective from April 1, 1975, changing "held by him" to "owned by him." The Revenue contended that since the bank account was in the minor son's name, the assessee was not the owner and thus not entitled to the exemption. The court referred to precedents from the Orissa and Madras High Courts, which held that the term "held by him" in section 5(3) extended to assets held by the wife or child, included in the assessee's total wealth. The court analyzed the amendments to section 4 and 5, emphasizing that the deeming fiction created by section 4 included assets of the spouse or minor child in the net wealth of the assessee. The court cited the Supreme Court's ruling that liability to wealth-tax arises from asset ownership. The court interpreted the amendments as clarificatory in nature, ensuring that assets beneficially owned by the assessee or included in the net wealth were eligible for exemption under section 5(3). The court reasoned that if the value of the spouse or minor child's asset is included in the net wealth, the associated exemption must also apply. The court concluded that the assessee, deemed as the owner under the legal fiction of section 4, was entitled to the exemption of Rs. 1,50,000 under section 5(3). The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee was upheld, ruling against the Revenue.
|
