Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 305 1993 SLD 305 1993 PTD 544 (1992) 198 ITR 122
Calcutta High Court
Matter No. 3126 of 1990, decision dated: 16-05-1991
AJIT K. SENGUPTA AND SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

VS

GOVIND PRASAD KANUDIA

Law: Wealth Tax Act, 1957

Section: 27(1),25(2),5(1)(xxxii)

Law: Income Tax Act, 1961

Section: 28

Wealth Tax--- ----Exemption---Industrial undertaking---Partner---Condition precedent for partner claiming exemption under S.5(1)(xxxii), Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957--­Industrial undertaking should belong to firm---Firm giving industrial undertaking on lease---Partner entitled to exemption---Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957, S.5(1)(xxxii). In order that a partner may claim exemption under section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, the primary condition to be satisfied is that the assets of the industrial undertaking must "belong" to a firm or an association of persons of which the assessee is a partner. The assessee was a partner of K firm which owned a flour mill. The flour mill was an industrial undertaking within the meaning of section 5(1)(xxxii) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. In 1976, the firm gave the flour mill to GV on a leave and licence basis. The licence was originally granted for three years but GV had been running the mill even after the expiry of the period. The Wealth Tax Officer granted exemption to the assessee for the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84 under section 5(1)(xxxii). But the Commissioner of Wealth Tax passed an order under section 25(2) of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to withdraw the exemption. The Tribunal vacated the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. On a reference: Held, that the ownership of the industrial undertaking vested in the firm itself and this was clear from the agreement entered into with GV. The assessee was, therefore, entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(xxxii). CWT v. C.S. Rao (1988).174 ITR 612 (AP) fol. CIT v. Prem Chand Jute Mills Ltd. (1978) 114 ITR 769 (Cal.); CWT v. Lakshmi (K.) (1983) 142 ITR 656 (Mad.) and CWT v. Shenbagamoorthy (P.T.N.) (1983) 144 ITR 724 (Mad.) ref. JUDGMENT SHYAMAL KUMAR SEN, J.---By the reference application under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Central I, Calcutta, required the Appellate Tribunal to refer the following common questions of law arising out of a consolidated order of the Appellate Tribunal in WTA Nos. 87 and 88(Cal.) of 1989 to this Court for opinion: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492