1993 (6) TMI 111 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Valuation of the first and second floors leased out to Central Silk Board (CSB).
2. Estimation of fair rent for the ground floor.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Valuation of the First and Second Floors Leased Out to Central Silk Board (CSB):

The controversy in ground Nos. 1 & 2 revolves around the valuation of the first and second floors leased out by the assessee to the Central Silk Board (CSB) on a monthly rent of Rs. 14,400. The assessee contended that the rent should exclude charges for fixtures and fittings, which amounted to Rs. 2,750 for the first floor and Rs. 2,000 for the second floor. According to the assessee, only the rent for the premises should be considered for valuation under rule 1BB.

The Assessing Officer, however, included the entire sum of Rs. 14,400 as the gross rent and, after deductions, arrived at a net maintainable rent of Rs. 1,33,481. This net rent was then multiplied by 12.5 times to arrive at a value of Rs. 16,67,888, which was added to the wealth returned. The First Appellate Authority upheld this method, agreeing that the entire sum of Rs. 14,400 was a composite rent for the use, occupation, and enjoyment of the premises, including fixtures and fittings.

The Tribunal examined the lease deeds and the definition of "rent" as per judicial precedents and dictionaries. It was noted that the lease deeds did not separate the rent for the premises from the charges for fixtures and fittings. The Tribunal concluded that the intention of both parties was to treat the rent as a composite sum for the entire leased property, including fixtures and fittings. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the Assessing Officer's valuation method, confirming that the entire sum of Rs. 14,400 should be considered as rent for the purpose of rule 1BB.

2. Estimation of Fair Rent for the Ground Floor:

In the 5th ground, the assessee argued that the Appellate Commissioner was not justified in estimating the fair rent for the ground floor at Rs. 5,000 per month, which the assessee considered excessive. The Tribunal reviewed the arguments and the findings of the Appellate Commissioner, who had directed the Assessing Officer to take the rent of the ground floor at Rs. 6,000 per month and work out the value accordingly.

The Tribunal found no infirmity in the Appellate Commissioner's direction and considered it fair and reasonable. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the valuation method and the estimated rent for the ground floor as directed by the Appellate Commissioner.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the valuation methods adopted by the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Commissioner. The entire sum of Rs. 14,400 for the first and second floors was rightly considered as composite rent, and the fair rent for the ground floor was reasonably estimated at Rs. 6,000 per month. The Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's contentions and upheld the orders of the lower authorities.