9911796707
TMI Blog1972 (1) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt year ending March 31, 1959, wherein he showed that he was possessed of jewels worth Rs. 40,000. The Wealth-tax Officer, however, did not accept that return, but proceeded to value the jewels in his hands at Rs. 1,00,000 based on the valuations of the jewels made in the previous years. His statement that he has disposed of a substantial portion of the jewels during that assessment year and that what remained with him was only jewels worth at Rs. 40,000 was specifically disbelieved. The valuation of the jewels at Rs. 1,00,000 during that assessment year was ultimately confirmed by the Tribunal. Subsequently the assessee's brother died on October 26, 1959, leaving the assessee as his only legal representative. Proceedings were thereafter in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not come forward with tangible evidence to substantiate her case that she has inherited jewels worth only about Rs. 3,350 and not jewels worth about Rs. 1,00,000. When the matter reached the Tribunal, the Tribunal has pointed out that except the ipse dixit of the assessee that she inherited only jewels worth about Rs. 3,350, there is no other material to substantiate her case. In addition, it was also contended by the assessee that even her brother was not in possession of jewels worth about Rs. 1,00,000 either before or at the time of his death, that the assessment made under the Wealth-tax Act for the assessment year ending March 31, 1959, against her brother cannot be conclusive on the question of the quantum and value of the jewels ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d as there was no material to support that plea. Further, there is the additional circumstance in this case that under the Estate Duty Act, the assessee as the accountable person was held liable on the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 being the value of the jewels inherited by her along with the other properties. The decision in Estate of Late G. Ramaswami Naidu v. Controller of Estate Duty which arises out of the estate duty proceedings initiated against the assessee as the accountable person has specifically held that the jewels worth about Rs. 1,00,000 passed to her on the death of her brother. The above two circumstances are relied on by the revenue to show that the assessee's statement that she inherited jewels worth about Rs. 3,350 cannot be accep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
