Wealth-tax exemption for non-resident external account deposits must be examined on the recorded facts, not denied for omission in the return.

A deposit shown to be held in a non-resident external account under the foreign remittance scheme was treated as potentially exempt from wealth-tax, so it could not be included in assessable net wealth if the exemption applied. The appellate authority was required to examine that legal position once the facts and supporting bank material were already on record, and it could not refuse consideration merely because the exemption was not claimed in the return. The contrary authority on a fresh claim before the assessing officer was held inapplicable on these facts. The refusal to grant exemption was set aside and the matter was remanded for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether a deposit held in a non-resident external account and received under the foreign remittance scheme was exempt from wealth-tax, and whether the appellate authority could refuse to examine the exemption merely because it was not claimed in the return.

Analysis: The relevant facts regarding the character of the deposit were already before the Wealth-tax Officer, including the bank confirmation and other material showing that the amount was held in a non-resident external account under the foreign exchange remittance scheme. An asset exempt from wealth-tax cannot form part of the assessable net wealth, and the appellate authority was required to examine the legal position once the issue was raised. The cited authority on a fresh claim not made before the assessing officer was treated as inapplicable on these facts.

Conclusion: The refusal to grant exemption was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for reconsideration of the exemption claim.

---