Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + AT Wealth-tax - 2015 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (8) TMI 235 - AT - Wealth-taxValidity of notice issued u/s 17 - Notice issued on he basis of audit objection - Addition in net wealth - Business Income - Assessing Officer observed that in this case the assessee was not carrying on any business in the impugned premises - Property given on lease rent - Held that:- There is nothing on the record to suggest that the Assessing Officer had issued the notice u/s 17 of the Act based on the audit objection. How the assessee came to the conclusion that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer was based on the objection of the audit, is not known. No material has been pointed out by the assessee that the notice u/s 17 of the Act was based on the basis of the audit objection. - The Assessing Officer had applied his mind after issuing the notice u/s 17of the Act. Therefore the question of change of opinion does not arise. This aspect was considered by the CWT(Appeals) by following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (2007 (5) TMI 197 - SUPREME Court) upheld the notice issued by the Assessing Officer u/s 17. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the CWT(Appeals). Any house which an assessee may occupy for the purpose of any business or profession carried on by him. As per clause (3) if the assessee occupies the house for the purpose of any business or profession it is excluded from “assets”. Therefore no wealthtax is required to be paid. But in the present case the assessee had leased out the land, building and machinery to a third party. Therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee has occupied land and building for the purpose of its business. Whatever portion was occupied by the assessee the same was excluded by the Assessing Officer and therefore we are of the opinion that as per sec. 2(ea) of the Act the assets leased out by the assessee are not excluded from the definition of “assets” - Decided against assessee.
|