https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34060 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's findings that the onus of proof under Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules rests with the Revenue to demonstrate market value exceeding book value by more than 20%. Firms engaged in processing goods are classified as industrial undertakings under Section 5(1)(xxxii), eligible for exemption. Rule 1BB should be used to value immovable property, and gross profit rate alone is insufficient for invoking Rule 2B(2). The decisions favored the assessee, aligning with precedents like CWT v. Moti Chand Daga and CWT v. Shyam Mohan. en-us Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34060 The High Court upheld the Tribunal's findings that the onus of proof under Rule 2B(2) of the Wealth-tax Rules rests with the Revenue to demonstrate market value exceeding book value by more than 20%. Firms engaged in processing goods are classified as industrial undertakings under Section 5(1)(xxxii), eligible for exemption. Rule 1BB should be used to value immovable property, and gross profit rate alone is insufficient for invoking Rule 2B(2). The decisions favored the assessee, aligning with precedents like CWT v. Moti Chand Daga and CWT v. Shyam Mohan. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Thu, 12 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34060