9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no infirmity in the argument of the AR in challenging the validity of the assessment which is subject to revision. Now as per the earlier order of the coordinate bench in this appeal on the order sheet it was found that the original records were required to be produced by the department. Such records were produced before us by the CIT- DR. On request to show the reasons recorded for issue of notice u/s 17 based on which the assessment u/s 16(3) was made, CIT DR could not show us such reasons recorded from the records. Order sheet of the assessment proceedings also did not show that any such reasons were recorded by the WTO. It is apparent that the original order passed u/s 16(3) of the Act read with section 17 of the WTA Act is pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... U/s 25 and the Order passed U/s 25(2) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, both are illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 2. That the Commissioner of Wealth Tax has failed to appreciate that there is no erroneous committed by the AO while passing the Wealth-tax Order and there is no prejudice caused to the Revenue, hence, the order passed by the Commissioner of Wealth Tax U/s 25(2) of the Act, is liable to be quashed. 3. That the Learned Commissioner erred in law as well as on facts of the present case, in exercising its jurisdiction u/s 25 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 to revise the assessment order dated 26.12.2011, {passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Central Circle-22, New Delhi (here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. During the course of hearing the assessee has filed an application for admission of additional grounds of appeal stating that the order passed u/s 25(2) cancelling the assessment passed u/s 16(3) read with Section 17 is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction as original notice issued u/s 17 and consequent assessment framed u/s 63 read with section 17 is illegal, bad in law and without jurisdiction. 4. The ld AR adverting to the application for admission of additional ground of appeal submitted with above ground could not be raised in the original appeal memo due to inadvertent reason and therefore, same is raised now. He submitted that omission to raise this ground of appeal in the original appeal memo can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice u/s 17 of the Wealth Tax Act on 01.10.2010 for Assessment Year 2003-04 for the valuation date dated 31.03.2003. The assessee submitted returned of Wealth on 15.12.2011 declaring net wealth of ₹ 1433854/-. Notice u/s 16(2) of the Act was issued on 15.12.2011 and total Wealth was assessed at ₹ 1433854/- as per order passed u/s 16(3) read with Section 17 of the Act on 26.12.2011. Subsequently, the ld CWT examined the records and he found that the ld WTO has accepted the property valuation at Chawla, Nazafgar gate at ₹ 24686500/- which was claimed exempt by the assessee in the computation of net wealth. The ld CWT noted that in Income Tax Proceedings for Assessment Year 2007-08 the assessment u/s 153A of the Act was com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue of notice u/s 17 of the Wealth Tax Act without recording any reason for reopening and therefore, the original order passed u/s 16(3) read with Section 17 dated 26.12.2011 itself is bad in law and consequent revision of such order itself is bad and liable to be quashed. 9. The ld DR vehemently opposed the arguments of the assessee and submitted that in the revisionary proceedings u/s 25 of the Act the assessee does not have any right to object to the original order passed by the ld WTO. He submitted that if the grievance of the assessee is so then appeal against the order passed u/s 16(3) of the Wealth Tax Act should have been filed. As the assessee has not done so the assessee cannot in this appeal challenge it. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment which is subject to revision. 12. Now as per the earlier order of the coordinate bench in this appeal on the order sheet it was found that the original records were required to be produced by the department. Such records were produced before us by the ld CIT DR. On request to show the reasons recorded for issue of notice u/s 17 based on which the assessment u/s 16(3) was made, the ld CIT DR could not show us such reasons recorded from the records. Order sheet of the assessment proceedings also did not show that any such reasons were recorded by the WTO. In view this, it is apparent that the original order passed u/s 16(3) of the Act read with section 17 of the WTA Act is passed without recording any reason showi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
