1990 (12) TMI 190 - AT - Wealth-tax

Inclusion of Pronote Debts in Net Wealth: Analysis of Valuation Principles and Debt Classification

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX. Versus DR. RADHA THIAGARAJAN.

The Tribunal held that the entire amount due under pronotes, including principal and interest, should be included in the assessee's net wealth. The debts ... - Issues Involved:1. Inclusion of the whole amount due under the pronotes in the net wealth of the assessee.2. Classification of the debts as mere pronote debts or as decreed debts.3. Consideration of hazards in the realization of amounts due under the pronotes.4. Determination of the realizable value of the pronotes in the open market.5. Adequacy of the debtor company's asset-backing to discharge unsecured creditors.6. Relief granted.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Inclusion of the Whole Amount Due Under the Pronotes in the Net Wealth of the AssesseeThe Department contended that the entire amount due under each pronote, including principal and interest, should be included in the net wealth of the assessee. The assessee argued that the company stopped making payments before the relevant valuation dates and there was no chance of realizing any amount under the pronotes. The Tribunal held that the amount receivable under the pronotes is an asset, supported by the Supreme Court judgment in CWT vs. Vysyaraju Badreenarayana Moorthy Raju, which stated that the value of rights in property, including interest due on accrual basis, should be included in the net wealth of the assessee.Issue 2: Classification of the DebtsThe Tribunal considered whether the debts should be treated merely as pronote debts or as decreed debts. Given the framing of a scheme of compromise or arrangement by the Madras High Court and the partial realization of amounts under the pronotes, the Tribunal concluded that the debts should not be treated merely as pronote debts but should be similar to decreed debts.Issue 3: Consideration of Hazards in RealizationThe Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's principle in CWT vs. Raghubar Narain Singh, which emphasized that the hazards for realization of decrees must be considered. Therefore, the Tribunal agreed that the hazards in realizing the amounts due under the pronotes should be taken into account.Issue 4: Determination of Realizable ValueThe Tribunal aimed to determine the market value of the pronote debts as on the relevant valuation dates, considering what a willing purchaser would offer in an open market. It adopted the asset-backing principle from an earlier Tribunal decision in WTA Nos. 731 to 734/Mds/84, which involved calculating the proportion of net assets available to meet unsecured loans and current liabilities.Issue 5: Adequacy of Debtor Company's Asset-BackingThe Tribunal examined the debtor company's balance sheets to determine its asset-backing. For the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85, the repayment capacity was determined to be 0.4018 paise per rupee and 0.0637 paise per rupee, respectively. Due to the absence of balance sheets for the subsequent years, the Tribunal assumed the same proportion for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87.Issue 6: Relief GrantedThe Tribunal directed that the net wealth of the assessee should include the proportionate value of the pronote debts based on the debtor company's repayment capacity for each assessment year. The departmental appeals were dismissed, and the assessee's appeals were partly allowed.Conclusion:The Tribunal's decision involved a detailed analysis of the valuation of pronote debts, considering the debtor company's financial position and the hazards in realizing the debts. The net wealth of the assessee was adjusted based on the proportionate value of the pronote debts, reflecting the debtor company's ability to repay.