9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 295X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee for exemption should be accepted Properties at Door Nos. 123 was leased out to the Tamilnadu Electricity Board and derived the benefits from the Board by way of installation of transformers Held that:- as benefits forms part of business and, therefore, they are entitled to exemption from wealth-tax in terms of section 40(3)(vib) of the Finance Act. Properties at Door Nos. 123 - one of the business objects of the assessee is leasing out the properties, a portion of the factory premises was leased out to M/s. Lotus Inks, which also carries on the manufacture of inks – Held that:- fact holding that the leasing out the premises owned by a company is part of the company's business and, therefore, the asset itself having been comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... formers. The property in Door No. 124 was leased out to one company by name Lotus Inks. Similarly, the assessee allotted the premises at Door No. 20, Hunters Road to the managing direc- tor for being used as residence. The assessee filed return of wealth on March 12, 1992, admitting a net wealth of Rs. 5,58,900. In order to regu- larise the return, a notice under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act was issued to the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee had stated that the return filed earlier may be treated as one filed in response to the said notice. As far as the Door No. 20 is concerned, it was the case of the assessee that since the premises was used for residential purpose of the managing director, who was an employee of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r for fresh consideration in the light of the ratio laid down by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in W. T. A. No. 1271/Mds/1992 dated April 8, 1996, for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. As far as the property at Door No. 124 is concerned, the case of the assessee was accepted on the ground that the leasing out the premises is part of the company's business and the premises itself had been commercially exploited, the assessee could claim exemption. This was taken on further appeal to the Tribunal by the Revenue and the appeals were dismissed. 4. In so far as the premises allotted to the managing director of the asses- see is concerned, the claim of exemption is made under section 40(3)(vib) of the Finance Act and the said secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as residential accommodation by any director, manager, secretary or any other employee of the assessee, such employee holding not less than one per cent. of the equity share of the assessee would be entitled to exemption. The second portion of the holding not less than one per cent. of the equity share of the assessee would be applicable only in case of employees of the assessee and not the director, manager or the secretary. In case even the manager or secretary do not hold any share, nevertheless the assessee would be entitled to exemption of the above pro- vision. For that reason, the claim of the assessee for exemption should be accepted. Accordingly, the first substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee and agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
