2018 (10) TMI 1192

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... X APPEAL NO. 571 of 2018 - -
Wealth tax
MR AKIL KURESHI AND MR UMESH TRIVEDI, JJ. For The Appellant : MR.VARUN K.PATEL(3802) For The Respondent : MR MANISH J SHAH (1320) ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. All these Appeals are filed by the Revenue challenging the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. Since the issue is common, so is the factual backg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d a horse chariot known as Buggy. This Buggy was made specially for the use of ceremonial occasions. It has extensive art work. The Buggy had substantial gold contents. According to the assessee, Buggy was a work of art and was therefore exempted from wealth tax in terms of Section 5(1) (xii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 ("the Act" for short). The Assessing Officer however discarded such defence of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... use (viii) would not destroy its very essence of being an article of work of art. 5. Learned advocate for the appellant - Revenue drew our attention to certain legislative changes, which took place in the said Act. He pointed out that Clause (xii) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 5 stood deleted with effect from 01.04.1993 by virtue of Act 18 of 1992. Consequently, the Tribunal was not correct in gr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X