9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision of this court, at the instance of the Revenue in ITR Nos. 20 to 23 of 1983: " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the agricultural property contributed to the firm by the assessee as his share of capital is agricultural land belonging to the assessee under section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act. They are partners of firms. They brought agricultural properties as their capital in the firms. During the course of assessment under the Wealth-tax Act, the respondents/assessees claimed that their share in the value in the agricultural property of the firm (contributed to the firm by them as their share capital) are agricultural lands belonging to them and so they are entitled to exemptio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operties of the firm, the assessees can claim exemption under section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act. Though the agricultural land belongs to the firm, really it is the partners who are the owners of the said land. After adverting to the decision of the Supreme Court in Addanki Narayanappa v. Bhaskara Krishnappa, AIR 1966 SC 1300, and also the decision in CIT v. R. M. Chidambaram Pillai [1977] 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ultural lands, are entitled to exemption claimed under section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act in computing their net wealth, is correct. In this view of the matter, we answer the questions referred to us in ITR Nos. 20 to 23 of 1983 in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We answer the question referred to us in ITR Nos. 212 to 214 of 1984 in the affirmative, in f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
