TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (5) TMI 69
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilding Rs. 31,023 . Rs. 2,80,698 Less creditors Rs. 3,34,355 (--) Rs. 53,657 The WTO thus held that the assets of the assessee were in the negative figure and so the assessee was not entitled to any exemption of the amount of capital invested in this firm. This order was passed by the WTO on 19th March,1975. 3. The assessee appealed against this order of the WTO before the AAC. The AAC found that the WTO did not entertain the claim as the assess could not prove whether the firm in which he is a partner is an industrial undertaking or not and also for want of particulars to be furnished in this regard. The AAC also pointed out that the WTO also the asst. yr. 1974-75 were in the negative figures and, therefore, the assessee was not entitled to the exemption claimed. The AAC, therefore, held that there was no clarity or uniformity in the action of the WTO. Before the AAC it was pointed by the representative of the assessee would be willing to furnish the required particulars, if an opportunity was given to the assessee. The assessee also pleaded that the claim of the assessee was valid according to s.5(1)(xxxii) of the said Act which was also supported by the commentary on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....differed from the interpretation given by the AAC and Shri Gulanikar and he declined to give any exemption to the assessee as per calculation given by him in the assessment order dt. 19th March,75 and then he calculated the total net wealth at Rs.1,40,500. 5. The assessee appealed against this order of the WTO before the AAC. The AAC disposed of the appeal by order dt. 28th June, 77 and he agreed with the finding of the WTO and dismissed the appeal. 6. Being aggrieved by this order of the AAC the assessee has filed the present appeal on the ground that the WTO was bound to follow the order passed by the AAC and so the subsequent orders passed by the wealth-tax Officer and the AAC and so the subsequent orders passed by the WTO and the AAC Asstt. Commissioner had previously given clear cut direction that the exemption be allowed for the full amount invested in the small scale industry. The assessee has also pointed out that s.5(1)(xxxii) of the said Act very clearly indicates that the land and building which has been the subject matter of exemption in any other provision of the WT Act is not to be considered for the exemption here but in the case of the assessee the land and buildi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e WTO to decide the issue on merits of the case in accordance with law and so the WTO was justified in differing from the finding of the AAC when he passed the assessment order on 12th March, 1976. 11. The learned counsel for the assessee has relied on the case of Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd. vs. ITO Bhopal (2). In that case the assessee company which manufactured and sold sugar used sugarcane purchased from other cultivators as well as grown in its own farms. It claimed deduction of agricultural income from its total income by valuing the sugarcane grown in its won farms at market value and deducting therefrom the agricultural expenses. The Appellate Tribunal directed the ITO to ascertain the average transport charges per maund from the purchasing centres to the assessee's factory and to add it to the rate of Rs.146 per maund in order to ascertain the market value and give any relief that may be due to the assessee. An application under s. 66(1) for a reference was made but it was withdrawn and the order of the Tribunal became final. The assessee applied to the ITO to give effect to the directions of the Tribunal, but the officer in his letter dt. 24th March, 1955, held that no r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....had clearly held that the WTO was not justified in deducting the value of factory office building and factory shed for the purpose of giving required exemption. He only directed the WTO to reconsider the claim after obtaining the required particulars from the assessee. He never directed the WTO to decide the legal position. Under such circumstances we hold that the WTO was bound by the order of the AAC dt. 13th Aug., 1975 and he was not justified in putting his own interpretation to the provision of s. 5 (1) (xxxii) of the said Act. On this ground alone the order of the WTO is liable to be set aside although it has been confirmed by the subsequent AAC by his order dt. 28th June, 1977. 13. Now let us consider the case of the assessee on merits also. From s. 5(1)(xxxii) of the said Act it is evident that Wealth-tax shall not be payable by an assessee in respect of certain assets and the value of such assets shall not be included in the net wealth of the assessee and such asset relates to the value, as determined in the prescribed manner, of the interest of the assessee in the assets (not being any land or building or any rights in any land or building or any asset referred to in any....