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 Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 1989 (12) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1989 (12) TMI 73 - AT - Income Tax

Issues:
Assessment of house properties in net wealth, validity of action under section 17 of Wealth-tax Act, time limit for assessments, effect of findings or directions in previous orders.

Analysis:
The judgment by ITAT Allahabad-B involved appeals by the assessee regarding the assessment years 1963-64 to 1976-77, concerning the inclusion of house properties in the net wealth of Raja Y.D. Dubey. The AAC set aside the assessments directing the WTO to make fresh assessments to determine the ownership of the properties. Subsequently, it was concluded that the properties belonged to Rani Dayawati Devi, leading to exclusion from Raja Y.D. Dubey's wealth and initiation of assessments under section 17(2) against Rani Dayawati Devi.

The main contention raised by the assessee was the validity of assessments completed after the prescribed period of limitation. The Revenue argued that the action under section 17(2) was not time-barred, citing Rajinder Nath v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 14 (SC) to support their position. However, the ITAT found that the assessments were initiated much beyond the time limit of 8 years, rendering them time-barred unless covered by section 17(2) of the Act.

The ITAT analyzed the provisions of section 17 and emphasized that assessments for escaped wealth must be initiated within specified time limits. Referring to relevant case laws such as N.K.T. Sivalingam Chettiar v. CIT [1967] 66 ITR 586 (SC), it was established that findings or directions under section 17(2) must be necessary for giving relief in the assessment year under consideration. As Rani Dayawati Devi was not a party to previous proceedings, the finding that the properties belonged to her was deemed incidental and not a basis for assessments under section 17(2).

Consequently, the ITAT allowed the appeals, quashing the orders of the authorities below. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to time limits for assessments and clarified the scope of findings or directions under section 17(2) of the Wealth-tax Act.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates