TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (10) TMI 96
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t in terms of clause (vi) of sub-section (3) of section 40 of Finance Act, 1983. In the alternative, it was contended that the value taken by the Assessing Officer was excessive. 4. The Ld. CWT(A) did not decide the aforesaid issues. He, however, found that the assessee had leased out another 1/3 portion of the remaining building, machinery of his business as such to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Co. Ltd. on monthly rent of Rs. 40,000 which fact had neither been disclosed by the assessee before the Assesssing Officer nor the Assesssing Officer had considered and included in the value of the same in the total wealth for the assessment year 1989-90. The Ld. CWT(A) therefore issued a show cause notice for enhancement of the assessee company's net wealth. In reply, it was contended that since the matter was not on record before the Assessing Officer and the Assessing Officer had not examined the same, it could not be taken up by the Ld. CWT(A) for enhancement. Reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Shapoorji Pallonji Mistry [1962] 44 ITR 891 (SC) and CIT v. Rai Bahadur Hardutroy Motilal Chamaria [1967] 66 ITR 443 (SC). Considering these submissions and contentions, the Ld.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s fresh order dated30-4-1993, consequently the impugned assessment covered under the present appeal had become infructuous. We also find that the Ld. CWT(A) in the impugned appellate order had not given definite finding with regard to the inclusion of the value of the assets leased out to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Mills Ltd. and he had not enhanced the net wealth of the assessee-company for the assessment year in question. Thus there was no enhancement of the net wealth of the assessee by the impugned appellate order of the Ld. CWT(A). As regards the setting aside of the assessment order we are of the view that the order of the Ld. CWT(A) could not be declared as improper or invalid on this ground. It is an admitted fact that the Ld. CWT(A) had detected the leasing out of the assets to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Mills Ltd. which had not been considered by the Assessing Officer in the impugned assessment order. This matter calls for proper consideration and verification with regard to its includibility in the total wealth and with regard to the determination of its value. The assessee's submissions and contentions also had to be considered by the Assessing Officer befo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t year : 1989-90) : This appeal is also for the assessment year 1989-90 but it is directed against the second order of the Ld. CWT(A) passed on7-2-1997against the fresh assessment order dated30-4-1993. As per setting aside order dated 11-11-1992 of the Ld. CWT(A) referred to above, the Assessing Officer passed fresh assessment order dated 30-4-1993 in which he took the value of the land leased out to the subsidiary company at Rs. 76,27,500 on the basis of DVO's report as against the value of Rs. 27 lakhs taken in the original assessment order as mentioned above. He took the value of the building leased out at Rs. 3,60,000 as against Rs. 10 lakhs taken in the original assessment order referred to above. The Assessing Officer however did not consider and include any value of the asset leased out to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Mills Ltd. on the basis of the observations and directions of the Ld. CWT(A). 13. Aggrieved by the aforesaid value taken by the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred first appeal before the Ld. CWT(A) against the fresh assessment order. The Ld. CWT(A) found that the Assessing Officer had not considered and included the value of the asset leased ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the asset leased out to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Mills Ltd. was includible in the total net wealth without giving proper notice of enhancement to the assessee. He added that this finding of the Ld. CWT(A) amounted to enhancement because he had directed the Assessing Officer to determine the value of the asset leased out to M/s Nishan Embroidery & Knitting Mills Ltd. and include the same in the total wealth. This clearly amounted to enhancement. He argued that such direction could not have been given by the Ld. CWT(A) without notice of enhancement as required under the law. He, therefore, contended that the impugned order of the Ld. CWT(A) was not proper and valid and the same deserved to be set aside. 17. The learned counsel finally submitted that in the interest of justice and fair play and for the purpose of avoiding prolonged litigation and for expeditious conclusion of the case, the order of the Ld. CWT(A) should be set aside and restored to him with the direction to decide the issue relating to valuation of the land and the building leased out to M/s R. Narain Dyeing & Printing Mills Ltd. in the light of the ITAT order in appeal for assessment year 1987-88 referred ....