1986 (9) TMI 148 - AT - Wealth-tax

Summary

Issues:
- Barred by time appeal
- Revisionary orders under section 25(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957
- Merger of subject-matter in revision
- Underassessment for assessment year 1979-80
- Validity of revisionary orders
- Merits of the case

Barred by time appeal:
The appeals were initially considered time-barred by three days, but upon verification, it was found that the appeals were filed within the time limit based on the actual service date of the orders.

Revisionary orders under section 25(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957:
The Commissioner invoked revisionary jurisdiction under section 25(3) due to underassessment for the assessment year 1979-80, as the value of the shares was deemed low compared to the actual sale price in November 1980. The Commissioner's revisionary orders were challenged by the assessees on the grounds of time limitation and merger of subject-matter.

Merger of subject-matter in revision:
The assessees argued that since the assessment orders were under appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), there was a merger of subject-matter, and the Commissioner could not revise those assessment orders. However, the Commissioner rejected this contention, stating that the theory of merger does not apply unless the issue in revision was part of the appeal before the appellate authority.

Underassessment for assessment year 1979-80:
The Commissioner found underassessment for the assessment year 1979-80 due to the discrepancy in the valuation of shares compared to the sale price in 1980. The Commissioner set aside the assessments and directed the WTO to pass fresh orders based on the revisionary orders.

Validity of revisionary orders:
The assessees challenged the validity of the revisionary orders, arguing that they were time-barred under the old law of limitation. However, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's orders, citing the amended law extending the time limit for revisions and the applicability of the amended provisions.

Merits of the case:
The Tribunal rejected the contentions raised by the assessees regarding the merits of the case, emphasizing that the reassessment proceedings for the assessment year 1980-81, where a higher valuation was adopted, supported the revisionary action for the assessment year 1979-80. The Tribunal upheld the revisionary orders based on precedents and case laws cited.

In conclusion, the appeals were dismissed, affirming the validity of the revisionary orders passed by the Commissioner under section 25(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, and rejecting the arguments raised by the assessees regarding time limitation, merger of subject-matter, and the merits of the case.