COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. RASIK ASSOCIATES

PDF · subscribers
WTR/22/1995HC GujaratGJHC24022704199529 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, in its judgment delivered by R.K. Abichandani, J., answered the question referred to it in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The Court stated that since the facts and the question involved were almost identical to those in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, decided on the same day, it was not necessary to reproduce the facts of this case. The reasoning for the decision is therefore contained in the judgment and order delivered in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93. The ratio decidendi would be that if the Tribunal's finding that the assessee's wealth is below the taxable limit is upheld, then it should be taxed at the normal rate. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

This case involves a Wealth Tax Reference No. 22 of 1995 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, referred a question of law for the opinion of the High Court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The reference was made at the instance of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax against the assessee, Rasik Associates. The High Court noted that the facts of this case are similar to those in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, which was also decided on the same day. The specific amount in dispute and the assessment year(s) are not recorded in the provided text.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, the appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee's wealth is below taxable limit and hence it should be taxed at a normal rate as against the maximum marginal rate? Assessee's Contention: The assessee's wealth was below the taxable limit, and therefore, it should be taxed at the normal rate, not the maximum marginal rate. The specific arguments or authorities relied upon by the assessee are not recorded. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, through the Commissioner of Wealth Tax, is challenging the Tribunal's decision. The specific arguments or authorities relied upon by the Revenue are not recorded.

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 22 of 1995

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 RASIK ASSOCIATES --------------------------------------------------------------

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 holding that the assessee's wealth is below taxable limit and hence it should be taxed at a normal rate as against the maximum marginal 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 →