9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as, the Tribunal has not done the aforesaid exercise, but instead adopted value of such inchoate instruments as found in the proceedings under the Income-Tax Act. In our view, the mode adopted to determine the value of the Bills of Exchange/hundis by the authorities under the Wealth Tax Act, as well as, by the Tribunal was contrary to the provisions of Section 7 of the Wealth-Tax Act. - Decided in favor of assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. 70 of 2003 - - - Dated:- 27-7-2018 - M.S. SANKLECHA, SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. Mr. M.B. Idnani with Mr. P.C. Tripathi, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sham Walve, Advocate for the respondent. JUDGMENT (PER : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) :- 1. This Appeal filed under Section 27A of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealth on account of seized hundis on the basis of Tribunal's findings ₹ 30,99,375/-. (b) cash found but not seized of ₹ 24,000/-. Thus, assessing the appellant to tax on ₹ 41.27 lacs of wealth by assessment order dated 30th March, 1995. 4. Being aggrieved by the order dated 30th March, 1995 of the Wealth Tax Officer, the appellant filed appeal to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) XXIX, (CWT(A)), Bombay. By order dated 19th November, 1996, the CWT (A), dismissed the appellant's appeal. 5. The appellant being aggrieved by the order passed by the CWT (A) dated 19th November, 1996 had preferred an Appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal being WTA No. 154/MUM/1997. The Tribunal vide order date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvanced money to these persons. In the proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal in the wealth tax proceedings, such Affidavits were also examined by the Tribunal and held that no credence can be attached to these Affidavits. Resultantly, the Tribunal in the wealth-tax proceedings upheld the order of the CIT (Appeals) and sustained the additions on this ground, after discounting the value determined by the Tribunal in income-tax proceedings by 25%. 9. The alternate ground advanced by the assessee before the Tribunal was that, in the given set of facts, the market value of the asset i.e. of hundis/Bills of Exchange has to be taken at ₹ 6,20,000/- as declared. 10. Mr. Idnani, Learned Counsel for the appellant has taken us through ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act. On this premise, he would submit that the orders passed by the Tribunal, upholding the order of CWT (Appeals) be quashed and set aside. 11. On the other hand, Mr. Walve, Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Revenue, has supported the orders and the findings recorded by the authorities under the Wealth Tax Act, as well as, supported the order passed by the Tribunal against which this Appeal is preferred. 12. Section 7 of the Wealth Tax Act reads as under : 7. (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), the value of any asset, other than cash, for the purposes of this Act shall be its value as on the valuation date determined in the manner laid down in Schedule-III. Thus the value of asset for the purposes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
