COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX vs. HAZARAT PIR SHAH-E-ALAM

WTR/60/1987HC GujaratGJHC24012235198712 April 2002Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KUNDAN SINGH4 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Roza Estate Trust is a Public Charitable Trust and that the disputed immovable properties belong to the Roza Estate Trust and not to the assessee, Saiyed Musamiya. The Court referred to its own judgment in ITR No. 135/1988, delivered on 11-4-2002, which had already accepted the finding of the Income-Tax Tribunal that the Roza Trust was a Public Trust and the properties in dispute were its properties. For these reasons, the High Court concluded that the Tribunal was right in holding that the Roza Trust was entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(i) of the Wealth-Tax Act and that the properties belonged to the Trust. Both questions were answered in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The references were disposed of accordingly.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Wealth-Tax (Revenue) has filed two Wealth Tax References before the High Court of Gujarat. In Reference No. 60/1987, concerning Assessment Years 1972-73 to 1980-81, the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Ahmedabad Bench 'C' referred a question regarding the assessee, Hazarat Pir Shah-E-Alam Roza Estate Trust (Roza Estate Trust), being a public charitable trust entitled to exemption under Section 5(1)(i) of the Wealth-Tax Act. The assessee had not filed returns, and the Wealth-Tax Officer (WTO) initiated assessment proceedings. In Reference No. 63/1987, for the same assessment years, the ITAT referred a question concerning whether immovable properties belonged to the Trust or the individual assessee, Saiyed Musamiya Imam Haider. The WTO assessed these properties in the hands of Saiyed Musamiya, also assessing them protectively in the hands of the Trust without granting exemption. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the assessment in the Trust's case, directing the WTO to re-examine the exemption claim. The ITAT confirmed this order. For Saiyed Musamiya, the ITAT concurred with the Commissioner (Appeals) to recompute his wealth after excluding properties held to belong to the Trust.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee, Roza Estate Trust, is a Public Charitable Trust entitled for exemption under Section 5(1)(i) of the Wealth-Tax Act, for Assessment Years 1972-73 to 1980-81. The Revenue's contention is that the Trust is not charitable, hence not entitled to exemption. The Assessee's contention, as implied by the Tribunal's prior decisions and the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, is that it is a public charitable trust. 2. Whether the immovable properties in question belonged to the Roza Estate Trust and not to the assessee, Saiyed Musamiya Imam Haider, for Assessment Years 1972-73 to 1980-81. The Revenue's contention is that the properties belong to Saiyed Musamiya. The Assessee's contention, as supported by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal, is that the properties belong to the Trust.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 5(1)(i),Section 17(1)(a),Section 16(5),Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

WEALTH TAX REFERENCE No 60 of 1987

WITH WEALTH TAX REFERENCE No.63 of 87

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE KUNDAN SINGH

============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements?

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement?

4.

Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?

5.

Whether it

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →