9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of section 25(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereby the Commissioner has refused to entertain the application for revision filed by the petitioners. The case of the petitioners is that under the provisions of the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, the petitioners are liable to make deposit and they have been making such deposits und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der the Wealth-tax Act standing to the credit of a subscriber under the compulsory deposit scheme which constitutes "annuity" within the meaning of section 2(e)(2)(ii) of the Act and, as such, the said balances are not assets within the meaning of section 2(e) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. Learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the said order passed by the Tribunal. The petitioners ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, together with interest due on the whole or, as the case may be, part of the amount of the compulsory deposit which has remained unpaid. The word "annuity" has been defined by the Supreme Court in the case of CWT v. P. K. Banerjee [1980] 125 ITR 641, wherein "annuity" has been observed as payment to be made periodically and should be a fixed or predetermined one and such amount would amount to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt. " I hold that the said amount deposited in the compulsory deposit scheme is to be repaid in five equal instalments and the petitioners are entitled to get exemption. As such, the order passed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax under section 25(1) of the said Act dated March 29, 1995, is hereby quashed and set aside. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The order dated March ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
