Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + HC Wealth-tax - 2015 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 122 - HC - Wealth-taxBenefit of Section 40(3)(vi) of the Wealth Tax Act - Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT has substantially erred in law in directing to delete the value of the assets used for the purpose of earning lease rent income treating the same as business income and thereby giving benefit of Section 40(3)(vi) of the Wealth Tax Act. - Held that:- Tribunal while deciding the appeal rightly observed that after the unit was set up, the assessee had admittedly never carried out the manufacturing activities for manufacturing of shoe polish. Further, The Tribunal rightly held that the facts of the case clearly indicated that the assessee wanted to exploit the asset as a commercial asset for commercial gain. It is further to be noted that leasing out had been done in the accounting year 1988-1989 and for the preceding assessment years, the assessee had shown the lease rent as business income, and the same had been accepted by the A.O. The Tribunal further held that the principle of res judicata was admittedly not applicable to the Income Tax Proceedings. - CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal has given cogent and convincing reasons in arriving at the conclusion and we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. In our view, the income of the assessee is a business income. Apart from that, learned advocate for the appellantrevenue is not in a position to show how the findings of the CIT (A) and Tribunal are bad in law and on facts. - Following decision of assessee's own previous case [2015 (1) TMI 438 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - Decided against Revenue.
|