9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Reopening of assessments under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act. Detailed Analysis: Reopening of Assessments under Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act: The appeals by the assessee were directed against the common order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals)-V, Kochi, dated 6-1-2004, for the assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91, and 1991-92. The sole common issue involved in these appeals was the reopening of the assessments under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee filed returns of net wealth for the assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91, and 1991-92, declaring net wealth of Rs. 28,04,100, Rs. 12,23,800, and Rs. 14,93,600, respectively. For the assessment year 1989-90, a revised return was filed declaring a net wealth of Rs. 17,22,600. The Assessing Officer assessed the net wealth at Rs. 18,20,500, Rs. 14,73,500, and Rs. 17,74,200 for the respective years. The property in question was a 40.845 cents of land with a building at Ernakulam, which the assessee valued at Rs. 1,68,500 in the revised return, accepted by the Assessing Officer. The property was possessed by M/s. Sreekumar Construction Co., a firm in which the assessee was a partner. The firm dissolved, and the properties devolved to the assessee. The Assessing Officer noticed that the properties included 10.580 cents of land with a building purchased through a single document. Section 7(2) of the Act provides for valuation under Schedule-I for a house used exclusively for residential purposes. The Assessing Officer believed that the valuation of the entire plot as one unit resulted in escapement of net wealth. Notices under section 17 were issued, and the assessee filed revised returns but objected to the reopening of assessments, arguing it was based on "information" from an audit party and was a mere change of opinion. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) upheld the reopening, stating that possession of new information was unnecessary, only a reason to believe that assessable wealth had escaped assessment. The assessee challenged this before the Tribunal. The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 17, which allows the Assessing Officer to reassess if wealth liable to tax has escaped assessment, but with restrictions if assessments were completed under section 16(3) and initiated after four years. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had already examined the issue of valuation in the original assessments, and there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Foramer France, which held that no action could be taken if the original assessment was made under section 143(3) and the notice was issued more than four years after the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had disclosed all material facts, and the reassessment proceedings were initiated after four years from the end of the respective assessment years. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was not justified in reopening the assessments under section 17. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeals of the assessee, canceling the reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment years under appeal and setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals).
|
