TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and with structures which was used in earlier years for manufacturing, is not an asset within the canopy of section 2(ea) of the W.T. Act. It is in our view continues to be a commercial asset. Thus, we delete the addition made herein for both the assessment years. - W.T.A Nos.2 And 3/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 3-5-2019 - Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member And Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri A. K. Tiberewal, FCA For the Respondent : Shri C.J. Singh, JCIT, Sr.DR ORDER PER SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM: Both these appeals are filed by the assessee directed against the orders of the ld. Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e: The firm M/s United Paper Products, with PAN-AAFU8098E, had owned an immovable property at Canal East Road, Kolkata as on 31.03.2004. Its fair market value was assessed at ₹ 4,35,78,000/- sometime in the financial year 2005-06 [that is, the year following the year under consideration for this notice] when it was sold. You are a partner with 1/3rd share holding in that firm. Under section 4(1)(b) of the W.T. Act, proportionate value of your interest in that asset is to be included in your net wealth. But it was never considered for assessment under Wealth Tax Proceeding. So the net wealth is believed to have escaped assessment. 4. The assessee s submissions is that the land and building owned and po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i. No objection certificate from West Bengal Control Board. ii. Electricity bills wherein the rate of electricity charged was the rates applicable to industrial unit. iii. Property tax bills wherein the Kolkata Municipal Corporation charged surcharge. The assessee referred to the provision of section 171(4) of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act 1980 which authorized the Municipal Corporation to charge surcharge in the case of property used for commercial and non-residential purposes. 6. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee because, during the Assessment Year 2006-07, the assessee had sold the land with dilapidated structure over it lock, stock and barrel to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
