1991 (2) TMI 4

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssment year in computing the net wealth of the firm in terms of rules 2 to 2E of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, in determining the value of interest of the assessee in the firm relating to the assessment year 1978-79 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that, if the amount of provision for taxation was not reduced by the amount of advance tax paid, then the entire amount of Rs. 4,15,000 representing provision for taxation would have to be added to the value of the assets of the firm in determining the value of interest of the assessee in the firm ? " The facts are that the Wealth-tax Officer, in his assessment, valued the interest of the assessee in the partnershi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....net value of the assets of the business as a whole. Opposing this, the authorised representative for the assessee contended that the tax liability was not future or contingent liability and as such the tax provision made in the balance-sheet could not be ignored. He also drew our attention to the Explanation to rule 2E. He further contended that under clause (a) of rule 2D any amount paid as advance tax could not be adjusted against the tax provision made. We do not understand why the assessee takes objection to the adjustment of the advance tax paid against the amount of tax provision because this has been done to its advantage. If the amount of tax provision was not reduced by the amount of advance tax paid, then the entire amount of Rs. ....