1985 (12) TMI 111 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues: Valuation of flat under r. 1-BB vs. WTO's valuation, Allowance of deduction under s. 5(i)(iv)

Valuation of flat under r. 1-BB vs. WTO's valuation:
The Revenue objected to the AAC's direction to value the flat at a lower amount under r. 1-BB compared to the valuation adopted by the WTO. The ITAT upheld the AAC's decision, citing a Special Bench decision in the case of Biju Patnaik vs. WTO. The ITAT found the AAC's valuation in compliance with the Special Bench decision and rejected the Revenue's contention. The ITAT concluded that the Revenue's objection on this ground failed.

Allowance of deduction under s. 5(i)(iv):
The Revenue contended that the assessee was not entitled to a deduction under s. 5(i)(iv) of the WT Act for a flat not registered in its name. The Departmental Representative relied on certain court decisions to support this contention. However, the ITAT referred to a Special Bench decision in the case of CIT vs. R. K. Sawhney and held that the assessee was entitled to the exemption under s. 5(i)(iv) of the WT Act. The ITAT interpreted the term 'assets' in a broad sense to include movable and immovable properties, along with any interest in property. Citing various court decisions, the ITAT concluded that the appellant was indeed entitled to the exemption under s. 5(i)(iv) for the flat in question. The ITAT rejected the Departmental appeal, upholding the assessee's entitlement to the deduction under s. 5(i)(iv).

In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the Departmental appeal, upholding the valuation of the flat under r. 1-BB and allowing the deduction under s. 5(i)(iv) for the assessee.