TMI Blog1994 (7) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8-1984showing a wealth of Rs. 5,76,400. The assessing officer issued a notice and required the assessee to show cause why the value of jeeps may not be included in the net wealth of the assessee since motor car includes jeeps. Relying on the decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Commissioner of Agricultural Income-tax v. Good Hope Plantation [1988] 170 ITR 173, the assessing officer included the value of jeeps in the taxable wealth of the assessee-company. 2. The CWT (Appeals), following the said Kerala High Court judgment confirmed the action taken by the Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax in including the value of jeeps in the taxable wealth of the assessee company. Aggrieved by the orders of the first appellate authority, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observed that "running of jeep would not be a wasteful expenditure keeping in view the nature of the assessee's business. Travelling by jeep could not be considered to be an amenity granted to any employee or a partner availing of the same for making him more comfortable. Since the Allahabad High Court had already drawn a distinction between a motor-car and similar other vehicle plying on the roads for the purposes of sales-tax classification, we are of the opinion that keeping in view the spirit of this provision and the nature of the assessee's business, the expenses incurred on running and maintenance of jeep should not be subjected to disallowance under sub-section (3A) of section 37". Regarding the decision of the Kerala High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 5 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950 and has considered the meaning of the word "jeep" keeping in view the said provisions. Similarly, in the decision of the Tribunal mentioned above, which relates to disallowing wasteful expenditure, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Allahabad High Court in Gopal Enterprises' case wherein certain notifications relating to levy of sales-tax were interpreted. A perusal of the notification No. ST-II-2956/X-6(17)-76 dated 20-5-1976 shows that sales-tax at the rate of 7% was leviable on motor cars; sales tax at the rate of 9% was leviable on motor trucks and motor buses, including their chassis and motor bodies built thereon; and sales-tax at the rate of 12% was leviable on " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bullion and real estate. As companies are not chargeable to wealth-tax, and the value of the shares of such companies does not also reflect the real worth of the assets of the company, those who hold such unproductive assets in closely-held companies are able to successfully reduce their wealth-tax liability to a substantial extent. With a view to circumventing tax avoidance by such persons, I propose to revive the levy of wealth tax in a limited way in the case of closely-held companies." Since the expression "motor car" has not been defined in the Wealth-tax Act, the normal rule of interpretation would be to follow the dictionary meaning of the said expression. The expression "motor car" has been given meaning in the Shorter English Dic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
