Case Details

Citation(s)
2001 SLG 1410 2001 SLD 1410 2001 PTD 974 (2000) 241 ITR 622
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Income-tax Reference No. 65 of 1996, decision dated: 20th July 1999
B. A. KHAN AND SHAMBHOO SINGH, 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

Smt. ARUNADEVI BAHETI

VS

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

Law: Wealth Tax Act, 1957

Section: 7(4),5(1)(iv),24(2),23

Wealth tax-----Appeal to Appellate Tribunal---Powers of Tribunal---Tribunal can allow new ground to be raised before it---Question regarding valuation of property---Tribunal was justified in allowing Revenue to raise question whether property in question consisted of one or two houses and remanding matter---Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957, S.24. The subject-matter of appeal before the Tribunal can only be the decision express or implied of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the jurisdiction of the Tribunal is restricted to the subject-matter of appeal. Once the subject-matter of the appeal is determined the Tribunal has very wide powers to deal with all questions of fact and law pertaining to that subject-matter of appeal and it can allow new question of law to be raised in support of the same. Section 24 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, provides for an appeal against orders passed by some Revenue forums. Section 24(2) says that the Commissioner may direct filing of appeal to the Tribunal in case he was not satisfied as to the correctness of any order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) or the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) under section 23 but that by no logic could be construed to mean that a new plea or ground related to the same subject-matter could not be taken before the Tribunal. CIT v. Late Begum Noor Banu Alladin (1993) 204 ITR 166 (AP) and Hukumchand and Mannalal Co. v. CIT (1980) 120 ITR 251 (MP) for. Held, that in the present case, the subject-matter of appeal before the Tribunal remained the same, viz., whether valuation made by the Wealth Tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. However, the Tribunal noticed that both the forums below had missed the vital facts as to the nature of property. It could well be that the plea of the property comprising of two hoses was taken for the first time before the Tribunal but this did not constitute a separate subject-matter than the one under appeal. Therefore, even if it was treated as a new plea or ground, touching the subject-matter of appeal to that extent the Tribunal was justified in entertaining it and…
🔒
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