GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (12) TMI 1321 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

2015 (12) TMI 1321 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT - TMI - Valuation - Inclusion of value of assets - Levy of penalty - Held that:- Difference in the valuation of the property as declared by the assessee and as assessed by the Assessing Officer did not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of the asset as it is well settled that valuation is a matter of estimation and estimation by registered valuer of the assessee and estimation by the District Valuation Officer being at variance d .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of these assessment years was also deleted. - no substantial question of law arises - Decided against Revenue. - WTA No.2 of 2014 - Dated:- 2-11-2015 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Jora Singh Klar, Advocate For The Respondent : None Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. This order shall dispose of WTA Nos. 2 to 6 of 2014 as according to the learned counsel for the appellant-revenue, the issue involved in all these appeals is identical. However, the facts are being .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f AO/CIT(A) in imposing/upholding the penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 even when the valuation of land as adopted by the Valuation Officer has neither been disputed before the CWT(A) nor before the Hon'ble ITAT by the assessee and there is huge difference between the value of assets returned and assessed and the assessee failed to disclose true and correct value of its assets before the AO? ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he valuation of assets by a District Valuation Officer is only an estimate without appreciating that the assessee has itself not disputed the valuation of assets? iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in deleting penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 whereas in view of section 40 of the Finance Act, 1983, the assessee was not entitled to any benefit under Part II of Schedule I of the Wealth Tax Act? v) Whether in the facts and circ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the owner of plot of land measuring 77004 square yards. The value of this plot was declared by the assessee as part of its asset for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87 on the basis of valuation report. The Assessing Officer received the information that the assessee had entered into an agreement to sell the said land and he consequently valued the said land and assessed the difference as wealth of the assessee. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) [CWT(A)] on appeal by the assessee uph .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing officer for the assessment years 1984-85 to 1986-87. Regarding the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, the assessee did not include the value of the asset in its wealth tax return as the assessee was running into losses and claimed that it was covered under Schedule I Part II of the Wealth Tax rules that in cases where there was loss assessed under the Act, no wealth tax was chargeable. As the value of the assets was included in the hands of the assessee in these assessment years, the Asse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion by registered valuer of the assessee and the estimation by the District Valuation officer being at variance did not attract the levy of penalty under Section 18 (1)(c) of the Act. With regard to assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, the case of the assessee fell within the purview of reasonable cause as it was under the bonafide belief that no wealth tax was payable during the said years when it had incurred losses. Hence the instant appeals by the revenue. 4. We have heard learned counsel f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tract the levy of penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, the penalty was deleted in respect of the assessment years 1984- 85 and 1986-87. With regard to the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, it was recorded that since the assessee had incurred losses in the assessment year 1987-88, its case fell within the purview of reasonable cause as it was under bonafide belief that no wealth tax was payable under the said years when it had incurred losses. Thus, the penalty in respect of these .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

asset as returned by the assessee and as assessed by the authorities below. The basis for declaring the value of the property by the assessee was the valuation report received from a registered valuer who is a person knowledgeable in the field. However, the matter of valuation of the plot of land owned by the assessee was eventually referred to a District Valuation Officer by the Assessing Officer, who in turn estimated the value of the land at a figure other than the value declared by the asses .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version