9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Decided against the revenue. - WTA No. 11/PN/2015 - - - Dated:- 9-12-2015 - Shri R. K. Panda, AM And Shri Vikas Awasthy, JM For the Appellant : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jain For the Respondent : Shri R.D. Onkar ORDER Per R. K. Panda, AM This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 17-07-2015 of the CIT(A)-II, Pune relating to Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of production and sale of vaccines which are sold in India and also outside India. It co-owns aircraft which was used in the business of the company. In the Wealth Tax return, the assessee company had not included the aircraft in the taxable net wealth on the g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the AO to exclude the amount of ₹ 18,49,18,112/- from the taxable wealth of the assessee. The relevant observation of the CIT(A) from Para Nos. 10 to 13 of the order read as under : 10. I have carefully considered the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the reply of the appellant. The fact that the aircraft in question was being used in the assessee's business is not disputed. The appellant has claimed that depreciation has been allowed on the same aircraft by the AO in the I T assessment. The appellant has also mentioned that the Assessing Officer has not included the Aircraft in the taxable wealth in A.Y. 2012-13. A copy of the order has been filed. 11. The only issue to be decided in the case is whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clusively used for commercial purposes. Quite clearly, substantively speaking, it is undeniable that the aircraft in question has been treated as a business asset, used in the assessee's business on which depreciation has been allowed and the same qualifies to have been used for commercial purposes within the meaning of section 2(ea)(iv) of the Act, and is excludible from the purview of net wealth chargeable to tax. Thus, the plea of the Revenue is untenable and is accordingly rejected. 12. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has also held as under in its decision in the case of CWT vs. Jay Pee Ventures Ltd.[2013] 37 Taxmann.com 348(Delhi): 9. The term commercial purposes has not been defined by the Wealth Tax Act - 1957. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not to restrict the meaning of the words commercial purposes to running the same on hire or as stock in trade. 12. The use of an aircraft by the executives or directors of a company for the purposes connected with its business would amount to use by the Assessee for commercial purposes. In case the Assessee was using the aircrafts for transporting its directors or executives for excursion purposes or for personal purposes the same would not qualify as use of the aircraft for commercial purposes and would not be exempt from wealth tax. In the present case the ITAT has recorded that it is undisputed that the two aircrafts were used by the Assessee for its business. Since this is the undisputed factual position, the same would be exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 18,49,18,112/- ignoring the fact that Aircraft has not been used for 'commercial purpose' and asset used for 'commercial purpose' specified u/s 2(ea)(iv) of the W. T. Act, 1957 does not mean asset used for business. 3) On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in misinterpreting the words Commercial Purpose for the purpose of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 where the intent of the Act was to include those aircrafts which were used to ferry passengers or freight as per regulations of the Directorate of Civil Aviation. 4) The order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be vacated and the Assessing Officer be restored. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
