Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri Dushyant A Dave

2016 (5) TMI 569 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

Net wealth computation - exclusion of property @ Delhi taken on lease - that:- The case made out before us is that the above stated Delhi house is on rent with the assessee and the same cannot be treated to be belonging to him. The Revenue fails to quote any statutory provision or a judicial precedent before us which could repel assessee’s contention that a residential house taken on rent could be assessed as net wealth in the hands of a tenant. We reiterate that the assessee has already placed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

il Chaturvedi, Accountant Member And Shri S. S. Godara, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Mrs. Somugyan Pal, Sr. D. R. For the Respondent : Shri S.N. Divetia ORDER Per S. S. Godara, J.M. These Revenue s appeals for assessment years 2004-05 & 2005-06, arise from two separate orders of the CWT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad both dated 22nd April, 2013 passed in case Nos.CIT(A)-XV/DCIT/Cir-9/453/09-10 & CIT(A)-XV/DCIT/Cir- 9/451/09-10 in proceedings under section 16(3) r.w.s. 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

edabad has erred in law and on facts in deleing the addition of ₹ 32,00,000/- made for Baroda house property and allowing the Assessee s claim u/s.5(vi) of the Wealth Tax Act for Baroda house property. 3. Both the parties are in agreement that the substantive issue involved in the two appeals as well as the relevant factual back drop is the same. We accordingly treat WTA No.12/Ahd/2013 for assessment year 2004-05 as the lead case. 4. This assessee is a designated Senior Advocate practicing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

es at Delhi having his residential address at no.26, Golf Link, 1st Floor, New Delhi. The Assessing Officer in his order dated 24.12.2009 treated this Delhi residential house as exempt to hold that the one in Baroda is not being used either for business or residential purpose so as to be covered by exempted category under the Act. He accordingly impugned the same in the assessee s taxable wealth thereby adding value therefore coming to ₹ 32,00,000/-. 5. The assessee preferred appeal. He in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eful consideration of facts, submission, the adjudication of grounds are as follows : All the grounds by appellant is against the treatment of Baroda property of appellant as taxable wealth and not allowing exemption to property as per section 5(vi) of the wealth tax Act on the ground that appellant's one residential property at Delhi Viz 26, Golf Link, 1st Floor, New Delhi is exempt but the same was a let out property i.e. appellant was a tenant paying rent regularly, claiming the same as e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is guest in his profession of advocate at supreme court, the A.O. treated it as exempted as per para 4.1 of the W.T. order, But, the property is not owned by appellant and the appellant through lease agreement reside/occupy this property as tenant and pays rent. This fact is duly evidenced by the claim of such rent as appellant's expenses in his I.T. Return. It is therefore I am inclined to accept that said property is not an asset taxable u/s 5(ea) of wealth tax Act, I am also inclined to a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pellant had a choice to treat one of the two property at Ahmedabad and Baroda as his residence for which he opted for Baroda property. It is therefore addition of ₹ 32,00,000/- for Baroda property wealth by W.T.O. is not justified and sustainable. He is directed to delete such addition and allow the appellant the claim u/s 5(vi) of the W.T. Act for Baroda property. 6. In result the appeal is allowed. 6. We have heard both parties. Leaned representatives appearing at the Revenue s and 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

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version