Wealth-tax valuation follows balance-sheet value unless the assessee proves written down value better reflects market value; reserves remained includible.

For valuation of a business under the Wealth-tax Act, the balance-sheet value may be adopted as the net asset value unless the assessee proves, with reliable material, that the written down value better reflects real market value on the valuation date. The court rejected any general rule requiring Income-tax Act written down value to replace balance-sheet figures. Amounts credited to contingencies reserve, tariff and dividend control reserve, development reserve, and the service line contribution account were treated as part of the assessee's assets for wealth-tax purposes; statutory restrictions on use or transfer did not by themselves make them excludible from net wealth.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, for valuation of the assessee-company's fixed assets under the Wealth-tax Act, the written down value under the Income-tax Act or the balance-sheet value was to be adopted; (ii) Whether the amounts standing to the credit of contingencies reserve, tariff and dividend control reserve, and development reserve were to be excluded from net wealth; (iii) Whether the amount in the service line contribution account was to be excluded from net wealth.

Issue (i): Whether, for valuation of the assessee-company's fixed assets under the Wealth-tax Act, the written down value under the Income-tax Act or the balance-sheet value was to be adopted.

Analysis: Under section 7(2)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, the Wealth-tax Officer may determine the net value of the assets of a business as a whole having regard to the balance-sheet and making such adjustments as circumstances require. The controlling question is the real market value of the assets on the valuation date. The burden lies on the assessee to show that the balance-sheet value is inflated and that the written down value truly represents the asset value. The court distinguished cases where the written down value was accepted on special facts, and held that no general rule requires adoption of income-tax written down value merely because depreciation was different under the two enactments.

Conclusion: The balance-sheet value on the relevant valuation dates was correctly adopted, and the written down value under the Income-tax Act could not be substituted as a matter of course.

Issue (ii): Whether the amounts standing to the credit of contingencies reserve, tariff and dividend control reserve, and development reserve were to be excluded from net wealth.

Analysis: The reserves were created under the statutory scheme governing electricity licensees and formed part of the assessee's assets for wealth-tax purposes. The contingencies reserve and development reserve had already been treated as includible in earlier authority, and the same principle applied to the tariff and dividend control reserve. The mere fact that statutory restrictions attached to use or transfer of the reserves did not make them non-assets or debts owed within the meaning of the Wealth-tax Act.

Conclusion: The reserves were not excludible and had to be included in net wealth.

Issue (iii): Whether the amount in the service line contribution account was to be excluded from net wealth.

Analysis: The amount standing to the service line contribution account represented an asset of the assessee and the relevant statutory arrangement did not justify its exclusion. The valuation of the undertaking under the Wealth-tax Act was concerned with the assessee's assets on the valuation date and did not permit exclusion merely because a statutory regime regulated treatment on sale or transfer.

Conclusion: The amount in the service line contribution account was not deductible and was includible in net wealth.

Final Conclusion: The questions referred were answered against the assessee on all substantive issues, resulting in inclusion of the disputed asset values and reserves in the taxable net wealth.

Ratio Decidendi: Under section 7(2)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, the balance-sheet value may be adopted for valuation of business assets unless the assessee proves with reliable material that a different figure, including written down value, represents the real market value on the valuation date.

---