2015 (4) TMI 1271 - AT - Wealth-tax

Wealth tax assessment - properties not liable to be included in the computation of the wealth of the assessee - HELD THAT - The Coordinate Bench in THE ACWT, CIRCLE-2, ALWAR VERSUS SHRI NIRANJAN LAL DATA, 2012 (3) TMI 638 - ITAT JAIPUR had considered all these properties in dispute for the purposes of wealth tax purposes and had held that all the six properties are not to be included in the wealth of the assessee by giving a detailed reasoning against each property. In this order when facts and circumstances are identical, properties are same for wealth tax purposes and Coordinate Bench had decided this issue for many years in favour of assessee and even revenue has been filing appeals repeatedly before us. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal of revenue on the basis of finding given by the Coordinate Bench in order above.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals), Alwar for A.Y. 2005-06 regarding deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer on various properties.

Analysis:
The Revenue filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals), Alwar for A.Y. 2005-06, challenging the deletion of additions made by the Assessing Officer on six different properties. The Assessing Officer had computed the total wealth of the assessee, including the value of each property, resulting in a substantial sum. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal partly, ruling that the properties should not be included in the wealth computation of the assessee. The Commissioner referred to previous decisions favoring the appellant in similar cases for other assessment years, concluding that the additions made by the Assessing Officer were unjustified based on past findings. The Revenue, dissatisfied with the decision, appealed before the ITAT Jaipur.

The ITAT Jaipur considered the arguments presented by both parties. The Revenue contended that the Assessing Officer's order should be upheld, while the assessee's representative supported the decision of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals), citing consistency with previous rulings in the appellant's favor. The ITAT noted that a Coordinate Bench had previously examined the same properties in a dispute for wealth tax purposes and had ruled in favor of the assessee, following detailed reasoning against each property. The Coordinate Bench had consistently decided in favor of the assessee in similar cases over the years, even when the Revenue had filed repeated appeals. Therefore, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal based on the findings of the Coordinate Bench, emphasizing the identical facts and circumstances of the case.

In conclusion, the ITAT Jaipur upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) to delete the additions made by the Assessing Officer on the various properties, citing consistency with past rulings and the detailed reasoning provided in favor of the assessee. The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed, affirming the findings of the Coordinate Bench in a previous order.