1982 (5) TMI 83 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues: Valuation of shares under the Wealth Tax Act.

Analysis:
The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chandigarh involved a dispute regarding the valuation of shares held by the assessee in M/s Associated Trade and Engineers Ltd. The contention was that the shares were valued at Rs. 400 per share, which was disputed by the assessee. The counsel for the assessee argued that the valuation should be based on certain deductions related to provisions for taxation and gratuity to staff. The Departmental Representative highlighted the applicability of rule 1D and opposed any reduction in the share value based on a lower valuation in a different case. The assessee's counsel referred to a letter disputing the break-up value of shares and relied on the valuation in a previous case involving the assessee's father.

The Tribunal considered the submissions made by the assessee regarding the computation of break-up value of shares in M/s Associated Trade and Engineers Ltd. The assessee pointed out errors in the valuation done by the Wealth Tax Officer, specifically regarding the failure to deduct provisions for taxation and gratuity to staff. By deducting these amounts, the assessee arrived at a lower break-up value per share. The Tribunal noted that the valuation adopted by the Wealth Tax Officer was incorrect and directed a revaluation based on the deductions, similar to the valuation in the case of the assessee's father.

The Tribunal found that the revenue had taken an inconsistent view on the valuation of shares in the same company, as evidenced by the variance in valuations between the assessee's case and that of the assessee's father. The Tribunal criticized the Wealth Tax Officer and the Appellate Authority for upholding the incorrect valuation without considering the deductions. The Tribunal directed the Wealth Tax Officer to revalue the shares at Rs. 169.70 per share, consistent with the valuation in the case of the assessee's father, and recomputed the taxable wealth accordingly. As a result, the appeal was allowed in favor of the assessee.