COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. HEAT KAVITA TRUST

PDF · subscribers
WTR/282/1996HC GujaratGJHC24022212199629 January 1998Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat, per R.K. Abichandani, J. and A.R. Dave, J., answered the referred question in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Court stated that a similar question had been answered by them on the same day in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93. Since the facts and the question involved were almost identical to that case, the Court found it unnecessary to reproduce the facts of the present case. The reasoning is based on the judgement and order delivered in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93. The operative direction is to answer the question in favour of the assessee. No issue was expressly left undecided. The reference stands disposed of accordingly.

What were the facts?

This is a Wealth Tax Reference case before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, arising from an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad. The Revenue, Commissioner of Wealth Tax, has referred a question for the opinion of the High Court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The assessee is Heat Kavita Trust. The specific assessment year(s) are not mentioned in the provided text. The dispute concerns the allowance of basic exemption to the assessee trust, which the Revenue contends was a discretionary trust. The procedural history indicates that the ITAT had directed the Assessing Officer to allow the basic exemption.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to allow basic exemption when the assessee trust was a discretionary trust? (Question of law and fact, concerning the Wealth Tax Act, 1957). Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the provided text. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue, through the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, is challenging the ITAT's direction to allow basic exemption, arguing that the assessee trust is a discretionary trust. The Revenue's argument is implicit in the question referred to the High Court. Authorities/Precedents Relied On: Not recorded in the provided text.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 27(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

WEALTH TAX REFERENCE No 282 of 1996

For Approval and Signature:

Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI and MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?

2.

To be referred to the Reporter or not?

3.

Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?

4.

Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?

5.

Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?

-------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Versus HEAT KAVITA TRUST --------------------------------------------------------------

Appearance: B.B.NAYAK with MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner Respondent served

--------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM : MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI and MR.JUSTICE A.R.DAVE Date of decision: 29/01/98

ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per R.K.Abichandani,J.)

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad has referred for the opinion of this Court the following question under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. "Whether, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to allow basic exemption when the assessee trust was a discretionary trust?"

A similar question has been answered by us today in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93. Since the facts are similar and the question involved almost identical, we do not find it necessary to reproduce the facts of this case. For the reasons given by us in our judgement and order delivered in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93 today, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.

----

*/Mohandas

More judgments on Section 27(1)

All 322 judgments and leading authorities on Section 27(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →