2012 (6) TMI 365

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... facts necessary for assessment for the assessment year 1992-93 ?   (2) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 had been rightly invoked in the case of the appellant for the said assessment year ?   (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in its conclusion that the appellant was assessable under item (2) Part I of Schedule 1 of the Wealth Tax Act, when the Trust was admittedly assessed under Section 21(1) of the Act ?   2. The assessment year under consideration is 1992-93 and the appeal arises under the Wealth Tax Act. The Tribunal upheld the order of reopening the assessment on the sole ground that the Kartha's daughter viz., Minor Tara was the sole beneficiary under th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aken up by the Wealth Tax Officer under Section 16(3) read with Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act 1957 by issuance of notice on 1.3.2001. The grounds on which reassessment proceedings was taken up were the same grounds for initiation of rectification proceedings under Section 35 of the Act also. Thus, placing reliance on the notice issued under Section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act, learned counsel for the assessee pointed out that mere change of opinion itself will not confer jurisdiction to reopen the assessment under Section 17. He submitted that unless and until the Revenue is in a position to say that there was failure on the part of the assessee in making full and true disclosure of all the materials necessary for making the assessment, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ust" and that the benefit arising out of the trust is to be assessed only in the hands of the beneficiary minor Tara..."   6. On going through the said notice, it is evident that the Assessing Officer initiated rectification proceedings only on the score that there is a mistake apparent on the face of the record and hence the assessment was to be revised. Therefore, it is obvious that the Assessing Officer had all the materials before him when he invoked the jurisdiction under Section 35 of the Act for rectification of mistake. On the admitted facts as disclosed by the records, it stands to reason that the issuance of notice under Section 16(2) as if the assessee had not disclosed the material facts fully and truly is totally without .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X