9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Exemption under section 5(1)(xxa) of the Act on share worth Rs. 10,11,686 - Denial of exemption for shares of specific companies due to lack of certificates - Interpretation of conditions for granting exemption under section 5(1)(xxa) - Discrepancy regarding eligibility of shares for exemption Analysis: The appeal involved a dispute over the grant of exemption under section 5(1)(xxa) of the Wealth Tax Act on shares worth Rs. 10,11,686. The revenue challenged the order of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) (CWT(A)) which allowed the exemption claimed by the assessee. The revenue contended that the conditions for exemption were not fulfilled by the assessee, as detailed in the assessment order by the Wealth Tax Officer (WTO). The main argument was that the exemption was not available to a dealer in shares, and the WTO had denied the exemption based on various grounds, including the nature of the assessee's shareholding and the valuation method used. The CWT(A), however, relied on previous exemptions granted to the assessee and her husband, and held that the language of the provision did not restrict the benefit to non-dealers only. The CWT(A) allowed the exemption for eligible shares in 14 out of 17 companies claimed by the assessee and directed further examination for the remaining three companies due to lack of certificates. The assessee's counsel supported the CWT(A)'s order, arguing that the exemption was wrongly denied by the WTO based on the dealer-in-shares argument. The counsel emphasized that the provision did not impose restrictions based on the capacity of the assessee as a dealer or investor. The counsel also highlighted that exemption had been granted in previous years and that the provisions did not specify that shares must be purchased directly from the company. The counsel pointed out that the WTO had eventually allowed exemption for the three companies in question after verifying the facts. The counsel's interpretation was that subsequent buyers of qualifying shares were entitled to exemption for the remaining qualifying period of 5 years. The ITAT, after considering the arguments and examining the provisions of section 5(1)(xxa), concluded that the exemption was available to both dealers and investors, provided the conditions specified in the provision were met. The ITAT emphasized that the exemption was granted for the initial issue of shares of companies engaged in priority sectors to promote industrial growth, without discrimination between dealers and investors. The ITAT upheld the CWT(A)'s decision to allow the exemption for the eligible shares and dismissed the revenue's appeal. The ITAT also found that the CWT(A) had correctly referred the matter back to the WTO for further examination of evidence regarding the eligibility of shares for exemption under section 5(1)(xxa) in the case of the three specific companies.
|
