Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 26 2015 SLD 26 (2015) 373 ITR 355
Madras High Court
TAX CASE (APPEAL) Nos. 23 TO 26 OF 2015, MARCH 11, 2015
R. SUDHAKAR AND R. KARUPPIAH, JJ
N. Devanathan for the Appellant. M. Swaminathan, Standing Counsel for the
Respondent

Vyline Glass Works LtdvsAssistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Co. Circle III(4), Chennai

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 16(3),17,35(1)(e)

JUDGMENT R. Sudhakar, J. - The above Tax Case (Appeals) filed by the assessee as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether in a case of wealth tax, the Tribunal has power to recall its order in the guise of rectification of mistake contrary to the provision under Section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act?" 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of glass products, especially laboratory items. The assessee had filed return of income for the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99. However, the assessee had not filed its returns of wealth within the due date. On a perusal of the statements enclosed with the return of income, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee had received rental income of Rs. 9,75,000/- and 72,00,000/- for the land and building leased out to M/s. Borosil Glass Work Ltd., Mumbai. Hence, notice under Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act was issued to the assessee, since as per Section 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax act, any building or land appurtenant thereto used for commercial purpose attracts levy of wealth-tax. Thereafter, the assessee filed return of wealth-tax under Section 14(1) of the Wealth Tax Act on 24.11.2003 admitting 'nil' income. After hearing the objections of the assessee, the Assessing Officer rejected the said objections and passed an order under Section 16(3) read with Section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act by determining total wealth of Rs.8,35,00,000/- each for both the assessment years. 3. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred appeals before the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals), who dismissed the appeals both on jurisdiction as well as on merit. 4. As against the said order, the assessee pursued the matter before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, by a final order dated 16.2.2007 in W.T.A.Nos.54 and 55 of 2006 remanded the matter back to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) for passing speaking order on the issue of re-opening. The relevant portion of the said order of the Tribunal reads as follows: "3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register