TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 658
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee filed the return for 1987-88 on February 3, 1988, with respect to his property which also included the abovementioned property. Its assessment was made under section 16(1) of the Act, vide order dated February 28, 1989, on the total wealth declared at Rs. 4,62,900 at Rs. 200 per square yard. 4. Sections 14 and 15 of the Act, inter alia, govern the procedure for filing the returns by any person, if his net income or the net wealth of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under the Act on the valuation date exceeded the amount which is not chargeable to the wealth-tax, in the prescribed manner setting forth particulars of such net wealth and such other particulars as may be prescribed or under a notice issued under clause (i) of sub-section (4) of section 16 or amendment of the return already filed, as stated therein. 5. After assessment under section 16(1) aforesaid, the Assessing Officer (AO) noticed that the Land and Development Officer of the Ministry of Urban Development, vide notification dated June 1, 1987, had fixed the value of land at Rs. 23,000 per square metre as against Rs. 200 sq. yard, therefore, the Assessing Officer started th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) in quantum appeals. 10. In all the above three assessment years, the Assessing Officer also started penalty proceedings under section 18(1)(c) of the Act for the concealment of the net taxable wealth. 11. The respondent-assessee challenged the above orders of assessments and also the orders with respect to the penalty before the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), respectively. The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) allowed Appeal No. WT/4/93-94/Sml against imposing the penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Act of the assessee for the assessment year 1987-88, whereas the other appeals of the assessee against the penalty were dismissed. Thus, the Department assailed the orders passed against them in a further appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench and the respondent-assessee also challenged the dismissal of their appeals by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. 12. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, disposed of all the quantum appeals, i.e., W. T. A. Nos. 432, 433 and 434....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Department was dismissed on July 19, 1994. Aggrieved by the said order an application was filed before the High Court under section 27(3) of the Act and the High Court, vide order dated July 18, 1995, ordered the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw the statement and refer the matter for its opinion. 15. Thus, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal made the reference on the following points for the opinion of this court : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in directing the Assessing Officer to value the property in dispute under rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules on the basis of scheduled rates circulated by the Government of India for bifurcating the property in dispute for separate valuation ? 2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is in accordance with law for bifurcation of property in dispute in the fact of evidence available on record ?" 16. During the pendency of the reference, the assessee filed appeals against the penalty imposed for the years 1988-89 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r to 1969 at the rate of Rs. 1181 per annum and this accommodation was having three rooms, verandah, kitchen, bath room, W.C. and open space lawn. Its split up was shown as under : 1. Built up portion 395 sq. yds. 2. Front law triangular 32 sq. yds. 3. Passage 118 sq. yds. 4. Lawn/yard on the back 147 sq. yds. Total 692 sq. yds. 24. The assessee claimed that the said property should have been assessed by applying the formula of rule 1BB provided under the Rules. 25. As a matter of fact, section 3 of the Act is the charging section. It seeks to bring to charge for every assessment year the net wealth on the corresponding valuation date of every individual, Hindu undivided family and a company. The expression "net wealth" is defined in section 2(m) of the Act. Section 2(q) defines "valuation date". Section 4 enumerates the assets to be included in computing "net wealth". Sections 5 and 6 exempt certain assets in India and outside from being included in computing the net wealth. Section 7, as it existed prior to its amendment, i.e., April 1, 1989, speaks as to who the value of the assets has to be determined. 26. Section 7(1), as it stood during t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting Assistant Commissioner." 28. Rule 1BB thus partakes of the character of the rule of evidence and not a substantive law. It deems the market value to be the one arrived at on the application of a particular method of valuation, which is also one of the recognized and accepted methods. Therefore, on consideration of the matter, in our opinion, prior to April 1, 1989, the property of the assessee was required to be assessed as per the provision of rule 1BB which was then in existence, on the basis of the scheduled rates circulated by the Government of India for bifurcating the property in dispute for separate valuation, but for the assessment year 1989-90 the wealth assessment has to be determined in the manner laid down in Part B of Schedule III, as per the amended provision referred to hereinabove. The above points of reference are accordingly answered. 29. In so far as the penalty appeals are concerned, the record reveal that the respondent-assessee had been showing the same value of their property with effect from 1967-68 onwards without a supportable document of valuation, but surprisingly the Department had accepted the same value. Even the Assessing Officer....