9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses of assessee on 27.08.2002. During the course of verification of records at the time of block assessment for assessment year 1997-98 to 2003-04, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had taxable wealth which had escaped from assessment as on 31.03.2002. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04. In response to notice, the assessee filed his Return of Wealth for assessment year 2002-03 on 30.03.2009 declaring net wealth of Rs. 4,72,800/- and Return of Wealth for the assessment year 2003-04 on 23.03.2009 declaring net wealth of Rs. 16,72,400/-. However, the Assessing Officer made addition of the following assets in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... econd appeal before Tribunal assailing the findings of Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals). The grounds of appeal raised by assessee in assessment year 2002-03 are as under: "The following grounds are taken without prejudice to each other- On facts and law, 1. Under the facts and circumstances of appellant's case and in law, the ld. CWT , Appeals erred in upholding that, following assets are taxable under the provision of Wealth Tax Act as held by ld. AO when all these assets are out of purview of term " asset" u/s. 2(ea) of the W.T. Act, 1957. Sr. No. Particulars of Asset Amount of Asset 1. 2. 3. 01. Flat at Shraddha Vihar Apartment 2,65,000/- 02. Flat at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have not been included in the 'Net Asset'. The Assessing Officer added the properties mentioned in the grounds of appeal in the net wealth of the assessee on the premise that the cost of properties has been paid by assessee and as such declared in the block return as undisclosed investment, therefore, these properties are to be included for determining 'Net wealth' of the assessee. 4.1 The ld. AR submitted that except for land at Village Camp and Gold Jewellery, none of the movable and immovable properties are registered in the name of assessee. The ld. AR further submitted that documentary evidences clearly indicate that these properties are not owned by the assessee. The ld. AR explained that flat at Shraddha Vihar, Solapur belongs to Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. Except for Mrs. Neeta Puranchandra Rao, wife of assessee, other persons who owned the property do not fall within the meaning of section 4 of the Act. The ld. AR in support of his submissions placed reliance on the following decisions: i) S.K Umar Vs. ACWT reported as 46 ITD 463 (Madras) ii) Shahrukh Khan Vs. ACWT, Mumbai Bench, 167 TTJ 73. 4.3 The ld. AR has filed a paper book containing 25 pages. The ld. AR submitted that the documents mentioned in Sr. No. 1 to 6, 8 and 9 are additional evidences which could not furnish before the Authorities below. Therefore, the same may be taken on record. The ld. AR pointed that these documents have been furnished to show that various properties which have been included in the net wealth of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies below. The Assessing Officer has made addition of the properties in the 'net wealth' on the basis of statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Undisputedly, the said statement has not been retracted by assessee till date. The assessee in his statement admitted that investments in the movable and immovable properties listed above are made out of undisclosed income. The ld. AR has reiterated the fact that the assessee has financed for purchase of assets in the name of his wife and nephews. It is also an un-rebutted fact that the assessee has disclosed the assets listed above in his block return of income. In view of the admitted facts, we find no reason to disturb the findings of Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
