TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1059X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht of the fact that the learned CWT(A) has decided the appeals without waiting for remand report called for from the Assessing Officer despite the fact that he himself has called for remand report regarding certain additional evidences filed by the assesse. Therefore, we are of the considered view that appeals filed by the assessee needs to go back to the file of the Assessing Officer to re-verify the averments made by the assessee in light of various evidences and to decide whether those assets are coming within the meaning of asset as defined u/s.2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. Hence, we set aside both the appeals filed by the assessee to the file of the Assessing Officer and direct him to redo the assessment after considering various ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the value of the property at Andheri, Bombay as it is also exempt being used for the appellants profession as cameraman whenever be visits Bombay for his professional assignments and the property was not used for any other purpose nor let out. 4 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed exemption on the value of the property at KK Nagar of Rs, 38,24,240/- used by the appellant as his residence u/s 5(1)(vi) of the Act as one house belonging to the individual is exempt from tax. 5 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have withdrawn the exemption granted for the flat at Ashok Nagar for ₹ 1.76,730/- as the appellant had claimed exemption for another property u/s 5(1)(vi) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s.17(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, therefore, the Assessing Officer completed the ex-parte assessment u/s.16(5) read with section 17(1) of the Act and determined net wealth of ₹ 73,92,194/- and ₹ 70,79,370/- for the assessment year 2005-06 and 2006-07 respectively. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority. The learned CWT(A) vide his order dated 13.12.2019 allowed partial relief in respect of net wealth determined by the Assessing Officer and directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the value of flat at ₹ 12,30,000/- for both assessment years. Further, insofar as flat at Andheri, in the absence of any proof regarding used premises for own business, upheld the findings of the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without waiting for remand report called for from the Assessing Officer to ascertain the fact whether property was let out and rental income was shown in the income tax returns filed for the relevant assessment years or not. It is the claim of the assessee that none of the assets are coming within the meaning of assets as defined u/s.2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, therefore, one more opportunity of hearing may be given to the assessee to go before the Assessing Officer to explain with necessary evidence and prove that assets are not coming within the ambit of Wealth Tax Act. We have considered the arguments of the assessee in light of the fact that the learned CWT(A) has decided the appeals without waiting for remand report called for f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
