COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. BA-BOOM VACANCY TRUST

PDF · subscribers
WTR/243/1996HC GujaratGJHC24022173199629 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 answered the question referred to it in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reasoning is based on the judgment and order delivered in a similar case, Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, decided on the same day. The principle established is that the ITAT was correct in directing the Assessing Officer to levy wealth tax at the normal rate. The reference is disposed of accordingly. No specific operative directions beyond answering the reference are mentioned, and no issues were left undecided.

What were the facts?

This case involves a reference made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad, to the High Court of Gujarat. The reference concerns a Wealth Tax matter for the assessee, Ba-Boom Vacancy Trust. The specific assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The challenge is to the order of the ITAT directing the Assessing Officer to levy wealth tax on the assessee trust at the normal rate. The High Court notes that the facts are similar to another case, Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, decided on the same day, and therefore, the facts of this case are not reproduced.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to levy the tax on the assessee trust at the normal rate? (Question of law and fact, concerning the rate of wealth tax applicable to a trust). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the provided text. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the provided text. The judgment states that the question is similar to Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, implying that the arguments might have been similar or covered by that case.

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 243 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 BA-BOOM VACANCY 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 levy the tax on the assessee trust at the normal rate?"

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 →