9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad, has referred the following question of law under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", for opinion to this court: "Whether, in law and on facts of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in excluding the amount deposited under C.D.S. from the net wealth of the assessee?" The present reference relates to the assessment year 1978-79. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows: The respondent-assessee is an individual. He has been assessed to wealth-tax for the assessment year in question. He had filed his return of wealth declaring the net wealth at Rs. 19,07,100. During the course of the assessment proceeding the only point in dispute r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ondent-assessee in the compulsory deposit scheme is not an exempted item and, therefore, it could not have been excluded from the net wealth and at best it ought to have been included while granting exemption of the deposits in a banking company for the maximum prescribed limit of Rs. 1.5 lakhs which exemption has been allowed in full by the assessing authority. Sri R.S. Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, however, submitted that the respondent-assessee was required to deposit the amount in the compulsory deposit scheme in accordance with the statutory enactment. As it was not out of free volition therefore, it cannot be treated as an asset. In any event, it was liable to be granted exemption. Having heard learned coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1A) of the Act subject to the limit specified therein. The submission that the amount standing to the credit in the compulsory deposit scheme is not an "asset" is devoid of any substance. Whether the amount is deposited, under any statutory enactment or not, normally it remains in the ownership and belongs to the assessee and, therefore, it is an "asset" which having not been excluded for granting exemption under section 5 of the Act, is liable to be included in the net wealth subject to exemption granted under section 5(1A) of the Act. As in the present case exemption under section 5(1A) of the Act to the maximum limit of Rs. 1,50,000 has already been allowed, the question of granting any further exemption does not arise. We accordingly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
