https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39601 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the inclusion of the house owned by the assessee's wife in the assessee's net wealth for wealth tax assessment was not justified in law. The court emphasized that the fiction under section 4(1) did not extend beyond its purpose and upheld the assessee's entitlement to exemption under section 5(1)(iv). The court rejected the revenue's argument that the property should be treated as belonging to the transferor for wealth tax purposes, affirming that Parliament did not intend to penalize the assessee beyond the transfer's effects. en-us Tue, 11 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Apr 2010 10:55:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39601 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the inclusion of the house owned by the assessee's wife in the assessee's net wealth for wealth tax assessment was not justified in law. The court emphasized that the fiction under section 4(1) did not extend beyond its purpose and upheld the assessee's entitlement to exemption under section 5(1)(iv). The court rejected the revenue's argument that the property should be treated as belonging to the transferor for wealth tax purposes, affirming that Parliament did not intend to penalize the assessee beyond the transfer's effects. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Tue, 11 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39601