2010 (3) TMI 451 - HC - Wealth-tax

Asset- whether the share of the assessee in cash incentive/duty draw back due to the firm was includible in her net wealth or not ? Held that- the amount in question of the share of the assessee in cash incentive and duly draw back did not represent any assets. The indicated amount of incentive was a personal reward for promotion of export of handloom goods given by the Central Government Handloom Export Promotion Council. Such reward remittance do not fall within the purview of movable or immovable property and cannot possible be termed as assets as defined under section 2(e) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. it was not liable to wealth tax.

Summary

Issues:
1. Inclusion of cash incentive in net wealth for wealth-tax assessment.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana involved a case where the assessee, a partner in a firm, had claimed a cash incentive from the Central Government through the Export Promotion Council. The Wealth-tax Officer included the amount equal to the assessee's share in her net wealth. However, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax ordered the exclusion of this amount. The Revenue, dissatisfied with this decision, appealed to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which also dismissed the appeal. Subsequently, the Tribunal's decision was challenged by the Revenue in the High Court.

The central question before the court was whether the share of the assessee in the cash incentive from the firm should be considered as part of her net wealth for wealth-tax assessment. After considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the relevant provisions of the Wealth-tax Act, the court concluded that the cash incentive received by the assessee did not qualify as an asset under the Act. The court emphasized that the cash incentive was a personal reward for promoting the export of handloom goods and did not fall under the definition of "assets" as per the Act. Additionally, the court noted that the wealth-tax liability in this case was minimal.

Based on the analysis, the court ruled in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue, holding that the share of the cash incentive in question was not liable to wealth-tax. Consequently, the court disposed of the reference in favor of the assessee, affirming that the cash incentive did not constitute a part of her net wealth for wealth-tax assessment purposes.