Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + AT Wealth-tax - 2015 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 1189 - AT - Wealth-taxViolation of the provision of the Rule 46A of IT Rule, 1962 - Non confrontation of contract notes evidencing sale of shares by the Assessee through a broker at Mumbai - Held that:- conclusions of the CWT(A) are not based only on the evidence regarding share transactions carried out by the Assessee at Mumbai. The payment of salary to Mr.Mukherjee and his correspondence and reports on various business information obtained from Mumbai and sent to Kolkata have not been disputed by the WTO. The payment of conveyance expenses and salary to Mr.Mukherjee showed that he rendered services to the Assessee at Mumbai. Mr.Mukherjee was using the Mumbai property both for his residence as well as for business purpose of the Assessee. These facts were not disputed by the WTO. The absence of trade license considering the nature of services rendered by Mr.Mukherjee in our view will not be very material. - The fact that the land is described as “Sali land” in the sale deed which was already available on record is not disputed by the Revenue. The evidence of payment of land revenue only supports the document already on record. Besides the above, the WTO did not agree with the stand of the Assessee mainly on the basis that in the past the land in question was considered as “Asset”. In our view therefore the conclusions of the CWT(A) therefore cannot be said to be erroneous or based only on the evidence of payment of land revenue to the Government. - Decided against Revenue.
|