1976 (5) TMI 34

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2 1,63,475 2. Ramniwas Karwa (Indl) 1/6 54,459 3. Gita Debi Karwa 1/6 54,458 4. Sandeep Kumar Karwa 1/6 54,458 . . . 3,26,750 3. In his wealth-tax return for the year under appeal, the assessee claimed exemption of Rs. 54,459 in respect of his share in the aforesaid property, as contemplated under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act. The WTO, however, without discussing anything on this point included Rs. 54,459 in the net wealth of the assessee in an assessment framed under s. 16(3) of the Act. 4. In appeal it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that after computing the value of the assessee's interest in the AOP under s. 4(1)(b) and 4(2) of the Act r/w r. 2 of the WT Rules, 1957, the assesse....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s well as r. 2 of the WT Rules, 1957, submitted that since the exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act is given to an assessee as defined in s. 2(c) r/w s. 3 of the Act, the wealth-tax authorities were not justified in not granting exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act as claimed by the assessee in respect of the aforesaid immovable property. It was further submitted on behalf of the assessee that since an AOP is not an assessee under the Act, it would not be entitled to exemption as contemplated under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act. In other words, it was submitted on behalf of the assessee that after valuing the Properties owned by the AOP as contemplated under s. 4(1)(b) and 4(2) r/w r. 2 of the WT Rules, 1957, the shares of each of the members ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....int of issue in the present appeal. He stated that in the said cause the point arose was whether the expression "individual" would include the corporations like Assam Financial Corporation. Finally, the learned representative for the assessee highlighted the fact that the CWT has already accepted similar claim made by one of the members of the AOP and that the WTO himself has accepted the assessee's claim for exemption under s. 5(1)(iv) of the Act in respect of the asst. yr. 1973-74. The learned representative for the Department, on the other hand, strongly relied on the order of the AAC and justified his action. 6. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and we find considerable force in the submission made on behalf of ....