2022 (9) TMI 617 - AT - Wealth-tax

Tribunal upholds wealth tax assessments for 2008-09 & 2009-10

The Tribunal upheld the assessments made by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) regarding the wealth chargeable to tax, ownership of agricultural land, ... Reopening of wealth tax assessment - Escaped assessment of wealth chargeable to tax - assessee was liable for wealth tax but has not filed wealth tax returns - HELD THAT:- As the assessee has not furnished true particulars of wealth, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer has rightly reopened the assessment. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed for both the assessment years. Land in question as an agricultural land - Going by the stand of the assessee, if the land in question is under land acquisition and notification for acquisition has been passed by the Government then how the assessee has shown the asset in the books of account. Secondly, on perusal of the reply of the assessee, AO has found that the names of the previous owner of the property are different than that of the names given by the assessee in his reply. The relevant findings of AO are reproduced hereinabove. In order to counter the findings of AO the assessee has not brought on record any material evidence to take a different view than the view taken by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed for both the assessment years. Issues:1. Reopening and reassessment of wealth for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10.2. Delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal.3. Assessment of wealth chargeable to tax.4. Exemption under the Wealth Tax Act.5. Ownership and title of agricultural land under acquisition.6. Adjudication of appeals.Analysis:1. Reopening and Reassessment of Wealth:The appeals were filed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the reopening and reassessment of wealth for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, as he believed that wealth chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The appellant contended that the land in question was agricultural and under government acquisition, thus not taxable. However, the Assessing Officer, after considering submissions, made additions to the total income, which were confirmed by the CIT(A).2. Delay in Filing Appeals:The appeals were delayed by eleven days, but the assessee filed petitions for condonation of the delay, which were accepted as the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause. The delay was condoned, and the appeals were admitted for adjudication.3. Assessment of Wealth Chargeable to Tax:The Assessing Officer noted specific assets to be brought to tax, including various lands and plots. The appellant had not filed wealth tax returns, leading to the belief that wealth chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 17 of the Act, as he found discrepancies in the information provided by the appellant.4. Exemption under the Wealth Tax Act:The appellant claimed exemption under the Wealth Tax Act for certain properties that did not fall under the definition of assets. However, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment due to discrepancies in the information provided by the appellant regarding the property at Gopanapalli.5. Ownership and Title of Agricultural Land:The appellant argued that the land in question was agricultural and under government acquisition, hence not taxable. However, the Assessing Officer found inconsistencies in the ownership details provided by the appellant. The appellant failed to provide substantial evidence to counter the Assessing Officer's findings, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.6. Adjudication of Appeals:Despite the appellant's absence during the hearings, the Tribunal proceeded to decide the appeals on merits after hearing the ld. DR and reviewing the available material. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the authorities below, dismissing both appeals filed by the appellant.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the assessments made by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) regarding the wealth chargeable to tax, ownership of agricultural land, and exemption under the Wealth Tax Act for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10.