TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stated to be engaged in the business of Gutkha, Perfume, Packaging of Chana Dal and also derived income from Commission and Rent. Assessee filed his return of income for AY 2009-10 on 10/03/2010 declaring total income of Rs. 7,60,720/-. Thereafter assessment was framed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order dated 09/12/2011 and total income was determined at Rs. 7,96,890/-. During the course of scrutiny proceedings, the AO noticed that assessee had land property at Rs. 9,87,61,681/-. The AO was therefore of the view that assessee was liable for Wealth Tax. Accordingly, notice u/s.17(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 was issued by him on 17/07/2013 and served upon the assessee and in response to which assessee filed return of wealth ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly -Stadium Plaza and therefore the said property is covered by the Exception Five -S.2(ea)(i)(5) of the Act and hence the same cannot be treated as "asset" for the purpose of determining wealth tax of the Appellant. Therefore, the said addition is also hereby deleted. 6.3 Addition of Rs. 12,00,000/- :- On perusal of Annexure - 3 to the letter dated 15/01/2014 furnished on pg. no. 1-2 of P/B, it is seen that it is a residential property. It is further seen that the Appellant is in receipt of rent of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Pg. No. 8 of written submission - being a ledger account of rent read with page no.8 of P/B - being a Profit & loss account). However, it is found that the said property was purchased in December, 2008 and therefore the said pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aim that the property was not a land, but commercial complex in spite of the fact that the assessee had not substantiated the same with cogent evidence during the course of assessment proceeding. (3) That the Id. CWT(A) has substantially erred by deleting the addition of Rs. 12,52,400/- & Rs. 15,66,060/-. made on account of plot and Joint Construction respectively, considering the same as exempt wealth, based on the assessee's claim that the property was self occupied in spite of the fact that during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee has already been allowed exemption for one residential property being self occupied property valued at Rs. 83,92,000/-. (4) That the Id. CWT(A) has substantially erred by admitting addit....