Registration and title in immovable property determine net wealth inclusion; unregistered conveyance left rule 1BB inapplicable.

Ownership of an immovable property for net wealth purposes was not complete until registration of the conveyance deed, so the bungalow could not be treated as belonging to the assessee on the valuation dates. Section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908 did not displace the requirement that title pass only upon registration. In the absence of a registered title deed in the assessee's favour, the residential house was excluded from assessment as an owned asset, and rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 was held inapplicable. The amount already paid under the conveyance was nevertheless treated as an asset.

---

---

Issues: Whether the bungalow property could be treated as belonging to the assessee for inclusion in net wealth under section 2(m), and whether rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 applied on the basis that the conveyance deed had been executed and lodged for registration before the valuation dates though registered later.

Analysis: The property was not held to belong to the assessee because ownership and passing of title in an immovable property requiring registration were not complete until registration of the conveyance deed. The legal effect of section 47 of the Registration Act, 1908 did not override the requirement that title pass only upon registration. Since there was no registered document of title in the assessee's favour on the valuation dates, the assessee could not be assessed as owner of the residential house. The amount paid under the conveyance was therefore treated as an asset, but the house itself was not includible as such, and the valuation rule for residential houses did not apply.

Conclusion: The bungalow did not belong to the assessee on the valuation dates, rule 1BB was inapplicable, and the inclusion of only the amount paid as an asset was sustained.

---