9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act which was introduced with effect from 01.04.1999. - No rental income - decided in favor of assessee. - 684 and 685 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 16-8-2011 - Akil Kureshi and Sonia Gokani, JJ Mauna M. Bhatt for the Appellant JUDGEMENT Akil Kureshi: In two separate assessment years, identical issue is raised in these Tax Appeals by the Revenue. The Revenue has challenged the common judgment of the Tribunal dated 13.11.2009 raising following question for our consideration: Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by CIT(A) deleting the addition of ₹ 1,55,40,445/- made on account of rental income from properties shown in the incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of joint venture partners, subsidiary company, group companies and consultants who were required to stay near the work site. The Assessing Officer, however, discarded such defence and added return down value of ₹ 50,80,000/- towards Udyog Bhavan and ₹ 1,06,00,000/- towards Hazira Guest House for the purpose of computing wealth tax liabilities, the total sum of ₹ 1,57,00,000/- was added combined towards these properties in computing assessing wealth. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before CIT (A) who deleted the addition accepting the assessee's version that the properties were used preliminary for the purpose of assessee's business and they were neither created nor let out for earning rental inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it should be used and occupied by the assessee. Such commercial establishment or complex is not includible in that wealth as held by the ITAT, Pune Bench in the case of Satvinder Singh Kalra vs. DCWT reported in (2007) 112 TTJ 489 (Pune). In that case, the assessee was having two office premises, which were let out by him and were claimed as specifically exempt from net wealth under section 2(ea)(i)(5) as commercial establishment. The A.O. Treated them as assets defined u/s. 2(ea). This was confirmed by the Id. Learned Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals). On further appeal, the Tribunal held that having regard to the nature of property as well as its use, the property can be classified as commercial establishment within the meaning of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... years. Having heard learned counsel for the Revenue and having perused orders on record, we find that the CIT (A) as well as the Tribunal have both concurrently come to the conclusion that the said two immovable properties were utilized by the assessee for the purpose of its own business. We may recall that the assessee, Government Owned Company, had pointed that the property at Udyog Bhavan was permitted to be used by the Government Officer for the short period and usage charges were collected. It has come on record that only a small portion of properties i.e. less than 10% of the premises were thus used by the Office of the Directorate of Petroleum, Department of Energy and Petrochemicals. This was done by the direction of the Gover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
