9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (1) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 (SAFEMFOP Act) and secondly, to the denial of the exemption claimed by the assessee in regard to his share of interest in the agricultural property held by the firms in which he was a partner. 2. So far as the second objection is concerned, the claim of the assessee has been negatived by the departmental authorities on the ground that since the agricultural properties are held by the firms of which the assessee is a partner, the exemption contemplated is to be considered in the hands of the firm alone while computing the interest of the assessee and not separately in the assessee's hands. However, at the time of hearing it was conceded by the learned departmental represen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property and that inasmuch as the assessee does not dispute that the property belongs to him and he is the rightful owner thereof, the considerations as to the effect of notice under section 6 is not relevant. Besides relying on the decision of the Mysore High Court in U. S. Nayak v. CWT [1968] 68 ITR 171 adverted to by the AAC in his order, the learned departmental representative also cited in support of his case the decision of the Supreme Court in Pandit Lakshmi Kant Jha v. CWT [1973] 90 ITR 97. 4. We have carefully considered the facts and the rival submissions of the parties. We do find considerable merits in the assessee's contention as to the effect of proceedings under the SAFEMFOP Act by the service of notice on the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property in such a situation by paying what normally it would fetch, but for the proceedings under the SAFEMFOP Act. At the time of hearing of the appeal it has also been brought to our attention by the learned representative of the assessee that this question of the effect of proceedings under section 6 had come up for consideration by the Tribunal in another case and the Tribunal accepting the submission on behalf of the assessee had remitted the matter to the ITO to re-determine the value of the concerned property after taking into consideration the effect of the notice and proceedings under the SAFEMFOP Act. The assessee submits that in the instant case also, the matter may be remitted to the WTO for redetermining the value of the prope ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observations : "The provisions of the SAFEMFOP Act are onerous, risky or hazard involved is also great so as to depress the value of the property considerably if not to nothing as contended by the assessee. The Calcutta High Court has also held likewise in the case of ITO v. Anup Kumar Kapoor [1980] 125 ITR 684. Therefore, there is force in the contention of the assessee and the authorities are not justified in rejecting the contention of the assessee. The point regarding the extent of depression in the value of the property has to be considered by the Wealth-tax Officer keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and also the decision of the Mysore High Court cited wherein 25 per cent discount has been upheld. Since both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
