TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 344X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... properties, therefore, the said property, in our opinion, is not exempt either u/s. 2(ea)(i)(3) or 2(ea)(i)(5) of the Wealth Tax Act - Appeals are dismissed - Wealth Tax Appeal No. 63 and 64/Mum/2011, - - - Dated:- 30-12-2011 - R.K. Panda, Vijay Pal Rao, JJ. P.R.V, Raghavan for the Appellant Parthasarathi Naik for the Respondent ORDER R.K. Panda, Accountant Member 1. The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dtd. 02.06.2011 of the ld. CWT(A) -22, Mumbai relating to A.Ys. 2004-05 and 2006-07 respectively. Since identical grounds have been taken in both the appeals, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see for its own office and hence it is a business property which cannot be considered as commercial complex or establishment as the said premises does not provide any commercial facilities available in a commercial complex as such. The A.O. also noted that the section 2(ea) specifically includes any property whether used for residential or commercial purpose but excludes commercial complex or establishment and the assessee's property was used for commercial purpose but it is not a commercial complex in itself. The A.O. distinguished the case laws relied upon by the assessee and determined the value of the property at Rs.6,19,23,163/- u/s. 7 of the W.T. Act by multiplying the net maintainable rent by 12.5 times. 2.1 Before the ld. CWT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onment Board, but does not include- (1) a house meant exclusively for for residential purposes and which is allotted by a company to an Employee or an officer or a director who is in whole time emolument- (2) any house for residential or commercial purposes which forms part of stock-in-trade; (3) any house which the assessee may occupy for the purpose of any business or profession carried on by him (4) any residential property that has been let out for a minimum period of three hundred day sin the previous year; (5) any property in the nature of commercial establishments or complexes;" 4.2 From the above, it may be noted that for exclusion in clause (3) as claimed by the appellant, the house has to be occupied by it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mendment brought by Finance Act 1998 w.e.f. 1-4-99, hence the same is distinguishable. The CBDT Circular referred to therein also relates to the pre-amendment period and hence it is distinguishable. In view of these facts and the legal position as discussed, I am of the considered opinion that the A.O. has rightly held the let out property of the appellant taxable as per the definition of 'asset' under the. Wealth Tax Act, which is upheld. 3. Aggrieved with such order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a business enterprise and the property is in the nature of a business asset. He submitted that the AO and Ld. CIT(A) are not justified in holding t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss of "Ship Management Services" as per the statement of facts filed before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the assessee is not in the business of letting out properties. We find the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Shankaranarayana Industries and Plantations (P) Ltd. (supra) after considering the various amendments to the Wealth Tax Act and CBDT Circulars issued had held that the intention was not to tax business assets used by the assessee for the purpose of his business or profession and also the business assets which are let out, if the assessee is in the business of letting out properties. All other types of commercial properties are taxable under the Wealth Tax Act. Since the assessee in the instant case has let out a part of it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
