9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 7(4) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, so as to have the property valued as of April 1, 1971?" The matter pertains to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1980-81 in respect of which, in the returns of wealth for these three years, the assessee took up a stand that the value of the house property should be taken in the assessment year 1971-72 at Rs. 2,17,400, and not as per the valuation report at Rs. 9,34,650. The Wealth-tax Officer, holding that the assessee was a non-resident and the property was not occupied by him for the whole year, held that section 7(4) of the said Act was not applicable to him, and that the valuation of the house property should be taken as per the valuation report. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined. Sub-section (4) thereof, which is relevant, reads as follows "7. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the value of a house belonging to the assessee and exclusively used by him for residential purposes throughout the period of twelve months immediately preceding the valuation date may, at the option of the assessee, be taken to be the price which, in the opinion of the Wealth-tax Officer, it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date next following the date on which he became the owner of the house or on the valuation date relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1971, whichever valuation date is later: Provided that where more than one house belonging to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the house owned by him and though he may not be actually present in the house when he is away from it, he is still in constructive possession of his residential house. So long as he intends to use his house and retains it exclusively for his residential purposes, the house would be said to be exclusively used by him for his residential purposes. The material aspect of the matter is that he has intention to remain in that house and not to give it up. By retaining the constructive possession of the house and intending it to be kept exclusively for his residential use, he would become entitled to the benefit of the provisions of section 7(4) of the said Act. Similar aspect came up for consideration before the Madras High Court in CWT v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for rent or allow it to be used for any commercial purposes, it cannot be said that he has not exclusively used it for residential purpose. As held by the Queen's Bench Division in Queen v. St. Pancras Assessment Committee [1887] 2 QBD 581, legal possession does not of itself constitute an occupation, and that the owner of a vacant house is in possession. If he furnishes it and keeps it ready for habitation whenever he pleases to go to it, he is an occupier, though he may not reside in it one day in a year. Therefore, the real test is whether his house is exclusively reserved for his residential purposes by the assessee, whether he actually remains in it or whether he is away from it retaining its exclusive constructive possession with him. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
