1979 (7) TMI 36 - HC - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the petitioner-club, an unregistered association of persons, is an "individual" under s. 3 of the W.T. Act and thus an assessable entity.
2. Validity of the notice issued u/s 14(2) of the W.T. Act for the assessment year 1978-79.

Summary:

Issue 1: Definition of "Individual" under s. 3 of the W.T. Act

The petitioner, an unregistered association of persons, contended that under the W.T. Act, only individuals, HUFs, and companies are assessable entities, unlike the I.T. Act which includes associations of persons. The petitioner argued that an association of persons is not specifically made an assessable entity under the W.T. Act. The court examined s. 3 of the W.T. Act, which is the charging section, and noted that it only mentions individuals, HUFs, and companies as assessable entities. The court referred to various precedents, including the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Sodra Devi, which interpreted "individual" to include groups forming a unit, but concluded that this interpretation was context-specific and did not apply to ordinary associations of persons under the W.T. Act. The court also considered the provisions of s. 4(1)(b) and r. 2 of the W.T. Rules, which provide for the inclusion of a member's share in an association's assets but do not make the association itself an assessable entity. The court concluded that the word "individual" in s. 3 does not cover an association of persons like the petitioner-club.

Issue 2: Validity of the Notice u/s 14(2) of the W.T. Act

The petitioner challenged the notice dated January 5, 1979, issued u/s 14(2) of the W.T. Act for the assessment year 1978-79, arguing that the club is not an assessable entity under the W.T. Act. The court agreed with the petitioner, stating that since the petitioner-club is an association of persons and not an "individual" under the W.T. Act, it is not subject to assessment. Consequently, the notice issued u/s 14(2) was quashed and set aside.

Conclusion:

The court allowed the special civil application, quashing the notice dated January 5, 1979, issued u/s 14(2) of the W.T. Act. The respondent was ordered to pay the costs of the application to the petitioner.