TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (1) TMI 454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 1998-99. The Departmental appeals and the cross-objections in the case of Ku. Priya Sanghi are directed against the order of the CWT(A)-I, Indore, dt. 22nd Dec., 2005 for the asst. yrs. 1997-98 and 1998-99. 3. Since common issues are involved in all the matters, all these appeals were heard together and we dispose of the same through this common consolidated order. 4. In the Departmental appeals the Revenue has raised common grounds/issues challenging the findings of the learned CWT(A) allowing the claim of exemption under s. 5(1)(vi),of the WT Act in respect of the value of flat at Embassy Apartment, Mumbai. The assessee in the cross-objections has challenged the computation of wealth for the purpose of levy of tax. 5. The facts....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... shares of their interest in the above flat were to be treated as nil. It was submitted that both the assessees are the beneficiaries in the trust named Ragini Priya Trust and shares of both these beneficiaries are determined. This trust owned a residential flat in Embassy Apartment, Mumbai, and the value of the same was computed by the assessee as per sub-cl. (b) of Explanation to r. 16, Sch. III to the WT Act. It was contended that while disallowing the assessee's claim of deduction under s. 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act, the AO himself was not confident about denial of the claim as he has only tentatively mentioned that the assessee had other immovable properties as shown in their WT returns and were enjoying deductions. It was contended that a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion as regards the immovable asset eligible for deduction except that in the case of plot of land the area should not be more than 500 sq. mtrs. Thus, if the assessee had any other immovable assets in respect of which deduction had been claimed under this clause, then this flat could be subjected to wealth-tax. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant is eligible for deduction under s. 5(1)(vi) and the value of the flat at Embassy Apartment, Mumbai, could not be included in the net wealth of the appellant. The AO, accordingly, directed to allow this deduction." 6. The learned Departmental Representative while assailing the order of the learned CIT(A) submitted that the assessees claimed deduction under s. 5(1)(vi) o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sel for the assessees submitted that the deduction under s. 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act was rightly allowed by the learned CIT(A) and the decision referred to by the learned Departmental Representative is clearly distinguishable on facts. The learned counsel for the asses sees submitted that in case the point in issue with regard to exemption of flat in question is decided in favour of the assessees in the Departmental appeals. then the cross-objections of the asses sees would stand infructuous because it only raises the dispute of valuation of the flat, in question, for the purpose of levy of wealth-tax. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and the material available on record. Sec. 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act as was applicable to the asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to deduction and exemption under s. 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act. The contention of the learned Departmental Representative was only that since no deduction was claimed by way of revised return, the assessees would not be entitled to deduction at the assessment stage as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. We do not agree with the submissions of the learned Departmental Representative because in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd., the issue was with regard to claim of deduction otherwise than claimed without filing of the revised return. However, in the present case the assessees did not claim any deduction. The claim of the assessees was with regard to exemption under s. 5(1)(vi) of the WT Act. The afor....