TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces shown with various parties - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- After hearing we hold that these balances were in the nature of commercial transactions which are not taxable under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. It is also pertaining to note that such outstanding balances were never brought for the taxation under W.T. Act by the Assessing Officer either in preceding or in any succeeding years. Therefore, on account of rule of consistency also, assessee deserves for relief, which has been rightly granted by the CWT(A). Considering all these aspects, we find no fault in the order of the CWT(A). - Decided against revenue. Addition of ₹ 60 lacs made by the Assessing Officer on account of factory Land at Namoli, Surajpur of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in deleting the addition of various balances shown with various parties amounting to ₹ 80,89,909/-. Assessee s grounds of appeal: 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order of ld. Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals)-1, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the CWT(A) is bad in law and contrary to the facts. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CWT(A), has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 60,00,000/- made by the AO on account of (i) Factory Land at Namoli, Surajpur ₹ 50,00,000/-, against original value of ₹ 11,00,216/-, and (ii) Factory Land Building at Namoli Surajpur ₹ 10,00,000/-, against original value of ₹ 1,55, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... infirmity in the order of the CWT(A). We dismiss this ground of Revenue s appeal. 3. In the second ground of appeal the Revenue has raised the issue of deleting the addition of outstanding balances with various parties amounting to ₹ 80,89,909/-. This addition was made by Wealth Tax Assessing Officer by observing that the assessee has failed to establish the nature of the balances which were outstanding on that particular day. 3.1 We have heard both the sides on this issue. After hearing we hold that these balances were in the nature of commercial transactions which are not taxable under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. It is also pertaining to note that such outstanding balances were never brought for the taxation under W.T. Act by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lding is chargeable to tax u/s 2(a)(i) of the wealth tax while urban land is chargeable to tax u/s 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth Tax. Therefore, both these issues need to be considered separately. The value of factory land estimated by the AO at ₹ 50 lacs was under litigation. Proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act were initiated by the Government in this regard. The assessee has filed a writ petition against the acquisition proceedings and the matter was still sub-judice before the Hon ble Allahabad High Court. He has submitted the documents like land acquisition Notice issued by the Government, Writ Petition filed before the Allahabad High Court were submitted but not considered by AO. It was also submitted that since there was a litig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would not render the assets taxable to wealth tax. Alternatively he also pleaded that the value adopted by the AO was not based on any valuation report of any qualified values. It was based on arbitrary and wild estimate. He pleaded to restore issue to the file of AO to be decided denovo. 6.1 We have heard both the sides, after hearing we are of the view that for estimating value of the asset AO has not taken help of any valuation report. Further valuation is necessary to arrive at the correct value of the assets. AO has not done so. In view of these facts, we remand the issue back to the file of Assessing Officer. 7. We order accordingly. We restore the issue to the file of the wealth AO for deciding denovo after providing an adequa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
