Indeterminate co-ownership interest in multiple houses justified exemption on aggregate value rather than a single selected property.

A beneficiary in a private trust owning house properties was treated as entitled to exemption under the Wealth-tax Act because the claim had been accepted in earlier years and was consistent with the connected High Court proceedings. Where the assessee's interest in each house was indeterminate and not separately ascertainable, the exemption was to be applied to the aggregate value of all four houses rather than to one selected property. The valuation method on 18 per cent of the aggregate value was upheld, and the allowance up to Rs. 1,00,000 remained available.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessee, as beneficiary in a private trust owning house properties, was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act. (ii) Whether the exemption limit had to be applied only to 18 per cent of the value of the costliest house or to 18 per cent of the aggregate value of all the houses.

Issue (i): Whether the assessee, as beneficiary in a private trust owning house properties, was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act.

Analysis: The assessee's claim had already been accepted in earlier assessment years on the same question. Following that view and the connected High Court proceedings, the Tribunal found no reason to deny relief under section 5(1)(iv).

Conclusion: The exemption under section 5(1)(iv) was available to the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether the exemption limit had to be applied only to 18 per cent of the value of the costliest house or to 18 per cent of the aggregate value of all the houses.

Analysis: The assessee's interest in each house was indeterminate and not separately ascertainable. As the assessee was only a co-owner and no specific house could be treated as exclusively representing her share, the proper method was to apply the percentage interest to the aggregate value of the four houses rather than to one selected property.

Conclusion: The exemption was correctly computed on 18 per cent of the aggregate value of the four houses, and the allowance up to Rs. 1,00,000 was upheld.

Final Conclusion: The departmental appeals failed and the assessee's exemption was sustained both on entitlement and on the method of valuation.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a beneficiary or co-owner's interest in multiple properties is indeterminate and not separately ascertainable, the relevant exemption or valuation relief is to be applied to the aggregate value of the properties rather than to a single selected property.

---