9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (11) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Wealth-tax Officer giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax in revision under section 25(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the tax liabilities were not outstanding for more than 12 months on valuation date and were thus allowable as deduction in the computation of net wealth of the assessee ?" Both the questions revolve round the same factual position and that is briefly stated thus : The assessee is an individual assessed to wealth-tax. Original assessments were completed in March, 1967, for the years 1960-61 to 1965-66. Subsequently, the Wealth-tax Officer initiated action under section 17 of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommissioner directed the Wealth-tax Officer to allow income-tax liabilities of assessment years under consideration. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal against the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order entertaining the appeal against an order giving effect to the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax in revision under section 25(1) and also against the relief allowed in respect of income-tax liabilities. The assessee filed appeals against the Appellate Assistant Cornmissioner's order not allowing the entire tax liability. On further appeal, the Tribunal held that it has to be borne in mind that the assessee had made a voluntary disclosure and that the assessee had agreed for certain additions. In the revision, the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s income-tax liability created because of the voluntary disclosure made by the assessee. The arguments of the learned Departmental Representative that before the voluntary disclosure there was no liability and, therefore, there was no debt because the assessee had concealed his income, appears to be attractive at the first blush but then we think that the argument is not tenable for the simple reason that the concealed income is of the assessee. It is a different thing that the assessee did not make a disclosure of it but then it does not cease to be the assessee's income and, therefore, once it is accepted that it is the income of the assessee, the natural consequence followed and that it is the tax liability created because of the disclos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... force in the reasoning of the Appellate Tribunal. If the Wealth-tax Officer had given effect to the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax passed in revision as such, without doing anything more, then it could be said that no order was passed by the Wealth-tax Officer, but he simply gave effect to the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax and, therefore, whatever remedy was available that was against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax only. But the Tribunal clearly held that the Wealth-tax Officer was simply directed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax to give relief to the assessee as per law, without giving any relief himself to the assessee. Therefore, we agree with the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal that the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
