Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + HC Wealth-tax - 1986 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1986 (9) TMI 50 - HC - Wealth-tax

Issues:
1. Valuation of unquoted equity shares for wealth tax assessment.
2. Treatment of provision for bad debts and gratuity liability in valuation.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Valuation of unquoted equity shares for wealth tax assessment
The court addressed the valuation of unquoted equity shares for wealth tax assessment under Rule 1D of the Wealth-tax Rules. The case involved equity shareholders in a company where the shares were not quoted on the stock exchange. The Wealth-tax Officer excluded certain items, including provision for bad debts and gratuity liability, from the valuation of shares. The court examined whether the provision for bad debts constituted a liability as per the rule. It was determined that the provision for bad debts, although not actual bad debts, was a liability as the board of directors had set apart a specific amount for doubtful debts, making it a known liability. The court distinguished this case from previous rulings and upheld the provision as a deductible liability in the valuation of shares.

Issue 2: Treatment of provision for bad debts and gratuity liability in valuation
Regarding the provision for bad debts, the court held that it was a liability as per Rule 1D and should be considered in the valuation of shares. The court rejected the Revenue's argument that the provision was akin to a reserve, emphasizing that it was shown in the balance sheet as a deduction from assets. On the other hand, concerning the gratuity liability, the court sided with the Revenue's position. It was noted that the company had an agreement with the Life Insurance Corporation, transferring the liability of gratuity payments to the Corporation. As the company only paid premiums and not actual gratuity amounts, the actuarial valuation of gratuity liability was deemed unacceptable. The court upheld the Tribunal's decision on this matter, ruling against the assessee.

In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the assessee regarding the treatment of the provision for bad debts as a liability in the valuation of unquoted equity shares. However, the court sided with the Revenue on the treatment of the gratuity liability, upholding the Tribunal's decision. The references were answered accordingly, with no costs awarded.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates