1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Court rules advance tax not deductible in share valuation for wealth tax, Compulsory Deposit Scheme assets included. No costs awarded.</h1> The court ruled in favor of the Revenue on both issues. It held that advance tax should not be deducted from the assets side in the valuation of shares ... Advance Tax, Compulsory Deposit Scheme, Net Wealth, Wealth Tax Issues:1. Valuation of shares of a company for wealth tax purposes.2. Treatment of amount credited to Compulsory Deposit Scheme Account for wealth tax assessment.Analysis:1. The first issue pertains to the valuation of shares of a company for wealth tax purposes. The Tribunal had to determine whether the advance tax paid by the company should be deducted from the assets side while full provision for taxation should be deducted as a liability. The counsel for the Revenue relied on a Supreme Court decision in Bharat Hari Singhania v. CWT [1994] 207 ITR 1 to argue that the advance tax should be deducted from the assets side. The court agreed with the Revenue's position and answered the first question in the negative and in favor of the Revenue.2. The second issue revolves around the treatment of the amount credited to the Compulsory Deposit Scheme Account under the Compulsory Deposit Scheme (Income-tax Payers) Act, 1974, for wealth tax assessment. The court analyzed the provisions of the Compulsory Deposit Act, which required certain income-tax payers to make compulsory deposits at specified rates. The deposits carried simple interest and were repayable in five equal annual installments. The court emphasized that the entire amount standing to the assessee's credit in the compulsory deposit scheme account constituted part of their assets for wealth tax purposes. Therefore, the question of discounting the value of the amount did not arise. Consequently, the court answered the second question in the negative and in favor of the Revenue.In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue on both issues, highlighting the treatment of advance tax in the valuation of shares and the inclusion of the entire amount in the compulsory deposit scheme account as part of the assessee's assets for wealth tax assessment. No costs were awarded based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
