Legal owner's net wealth includes immovable assets leased over 12 years, not lessee. Lease under 1 year excluded.

The Tribunal clarified that the value of immovable assets leased for less than twelve years is included in the net wealth of the legal owner, not the lessee. The parenthetical exclusion in section 4(8)(b) ensures that leases for a period not exceeding one year do not affect legal ownership for wealth-tax purposes. Leave and license agreements are not covered by section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act, with the legal owner retaining liability for wealth-tax. The case was remanded to the Division Bench for further proceedings.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Inclusion of the value of immovable assets in the net wealth of the owner/assessee or the lessee under section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act read with section 269UA(f) of the Income-tax Act.
2. Interpretation of the parenthetical exclusion in section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act.
3. Applicability of section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act and section 269UA(f) of the Income-tax Act to lease agreements with extension clauses, typically leave and license agreements.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Inclusion of the Value of Immovable Assets
The Tribunal was tasked with determining whether the value of an immovable asset should be included in the net wealth of the owner/assessee or the lessee. The Tribunal clarified that:
- The legal owner (the assessee) is liable to wealth-tax on the value of assets leased for a term of less than twelve years.
- If the lease term is not less than twelve years, the lessee, acquiring rights under such a lease, is deemed to be the owner under section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act.
- The Tribunal emphasized that section 4(8)(b) is a deeming provision and must be strictly construed. The lessee cannot be deemed the owner unless the lease term meets the twelve-year threshold.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Parenthetical Exclusion
The Tribunal examined the parenthetical exclusion in section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act, which states "(excluding any rights by way of lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year)." The Tribunal concluded:
- The words in parenthesis clearly exclude any rights acquired by a lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year from the scope of section 4(8)(b).
- The legal owner remains liable for wealth-tax if the lease term is less than twelve years, as per section 269UA(f) of the Income-tax Act.
- The Tribunal emphasized the plain and unambiguous language of the statute, rejecting the need for interpretative processes to ascertain legislative intent.

Issue 3: Applicability to Leave and License Agreements
The Tribunal addressed whether lease agreements with extension clauses, typically leave and license agreements, fall under section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act and section 269UA(f) of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal held:
- Leave and license agreements are distinct from leases and do not transfer any interest in the property to the licensee.
- Such agreements are outside the scope of section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act.
- In leave and license arrangements, the legal owner retains ownership and is assessable to wealth-tax.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal provided clear answers to the issues:
1. The value of immovable assets leased for less than twelve years is includible in the net wealth of the legal owner, not the lessee.
2. The parenthetical exclusion in section 4(8)(b) ensures that leases from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year do not affect the legal ownership for wealth-tax purposes.
3. Leave and license agreements are not covered by section 4(8)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act, and the legal owner remains liable for wealth-tax.

The matter was remanded to the Division Bench for further proceedings.

---