9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 659X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect to admission of additional evidence in violation of Rule 46A is concerned, we find that Revenue could not point out the documents which have been considered by ld.CWT(A) and were in the nature of additional evidences. In view of the aforesaid facts, we see no reason to interfere with the order of ld.CWT(A) and thus the grounds of Revenue are dismissed. - Decided in favour of assessee - W.T.A. No.02/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2016 - SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr.DR For The Respondent : Shri Ankit Talsania, AR ORDER PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the WTO by holding as under:- Decision :- 6. I have gone through the wealth tax assessment order, written submission and paper-book furnished before the undersigned. The various additions made by the AO are dealt as under. 6.1. Addition of ₹ 17,74,000/- : It is seen that the said property is a residential property situated at Mumbai (Annexure A to the letter dated 15/01/2014 furnished on pg.no.1-2 of P/B) and the Appellant is in receipt of rent of ₹ 1,11,000/- (Pg. No.8 of written submission being a ledger account of rent read with page no.8 of P/B being a Profit loss account). Therefore, the said property is covered by the Exception four S.2(ea)(i)(4) of the Act and hence, the same cannot be trea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . no.1-2 of P/B, it is seen that it is a residential property and self-occupied by the Appellant. Therefore, it is covered by the exemption provisions of S.5 of the Act and hence cannot be treated as asset for the purpose of determining wealth tax under the scheme of the Act. Therefore, the said addition is hereby deleted. 6.5. Therefore, Ground Nos. 3,4,5 are allowed. Ground No.2 is dismissed. 2.3. Aggrieved by the order of ld.CWT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised following grounds:- (1) That the Id. CWT(A) has substantially erred by deleting the addition of ₹ 17,74,000/- made on account of flat purchase, considering the same as exempt wealth, based on the assesseefs claim that he was getting re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nature held by him for business purposes and therefore those assets cannot be considered to be an asset within the meaning of asset u/s.2(ea)(i)(3) and section 2(ea)(i)(5) of the Wealth Tax Act. He further submitted that the assessee was receiving the rent from the properties at Delhi Karol Baug and Bombay and during the year under consideration assessee has received aggregate rent of ₹ 2,11,000/- and the same was reflected in the computation of total income. He also pointed out to the Profit Loss Account, Ledger Account and Rent and computation of income, the copy of which were placed in the paper-book. He therefore submitted that since the property from which assessee has received rent, the properties cannot be considered as taxa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
