https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268380 A house occupied for business purposes is excluded from "asset" under section 2(ea)(i)(3) of the Wealth-tax Act where the facts show actual business use, including receipt of business information, communication of reports and employee use for business activities; absence of a trade licence was treated as immaterial on these facts. An evidentiary objection under Rule 46A did not succeed because the appellate finding was supported by material already on record, including salary, correspondence and the nature of use, rather than solely by the disputed documents. The Mumbai flat was therefore excluded from net wealth and the revenue's challenge failed. en-us Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268380 A house occupied for business purposes is excluded from "asset" under section 2(ea)(i)(3) of the Wealth-tax Act where the facts show actual business use, including receipt of business information, communication of reports and employee use for business activities; absence of a trade licence was treated as immaterial on these facts. An evidentiary objection under Rule 46A did not succeed because the appellate finding was supported by material already on record, including salary, correspondence and the nature of use, rather than solely by the disputed documents. The Mumbai flat was therefore excluded from net wealth and the revenue's challenge failed. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Fri, 16 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268380