Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + HC Wealth-tax - 2010 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (10) TMI 800 - HC - Wealth-taxGold - an asset belonging to the assessee on the relevant valuation date and the value includible in the net wealth of the assessee – Held that:- 66 kgs. of gold has not been returned to the assessee nor the same could be recovered by the police. No proceedings for recovery of the said gold are pending. The assessee's claim to get back the gold also stands barred by the law of limitation. Keeping all these facts in view, we find ample force in the contention of the assessee that the said gold stands lost. For including the value of an asset in the net wealth of the assessee, the asset must be in existence on the relevant valuation date. Since that gold was not in existence on the relevant valuation date, its value, in our opinion, is not includible in the assessee's net wealth, no flaw in the aforesaid reasoning and there is no reason to take a different view when for other assessment period the above finding has become final. Thus, we hold that this 66 kgs. of gold cannot be held to be an asset on the relevant valuation date and its value is not includible in the net wealth of assessee, it is also held that 123 kgs. of gold (57 kgs. + 66 kgs.) was not an asset belonging to the assessee and value thereof is not includible in the net wealth of assessee. The question Nos. (1) and (4) are accordingly answered in favour of the assessee Silver - an asset belonging to the assessee on the relevant valuation date and its value is to be included in the net wealth of the assessee - deduction for the sum of Rs. 25 lakhs being the penalty imposed for contravention of the Gold Control Rules and remaining unpaid on the relevant valuation date - Tribunal directed the AO to include 50 per cent of the value of silver as determined by him in the assessment orders in the net wealth of the assessee – Held that:- WTO had made heavy addition on account of valuation of the silver bullion in question. The CWT(A) held that the silver bullion during the period was not an asset of the assessee, therefore, adopted nil value of the said asset. The Tribunal held that silver bullion in question was an asset of the appellant but the Tribunal because of the heavy addition accepted the contention of counsel for the assessee and took the discounted value of the silver bullion and directed the WTO to add 50 per cent of the additions adopted by him in the assessment order. We find substance in the argument of the counsel for the assessee that since the silver bullion was seized and it was not available to the assessee for use for such a long period of time, therefore, discounted value has rightly been adopted. The counsel for the respondent-Revenue could not point out as to what was wrong in adopting the discounted value of the silver bullion in the peculiar facts of the present case. Thus, this question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue
|