COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH-TAX vs. APAK SETTLEMENT

PDF · subscribers
WTR/79/1995HC GujaratGJHC24022761199529 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 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 similar to Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, decided on the same day, it was not necessary to reproduce the facts. For the reasons given in the judgment and order delivered in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, the Court found the Tribunal to be right. The reference was disposed of accordingly. The specific reasoning from the prior judgment was not detailed in this excerpt, but the outcome indicates that the Tribunal's finding that the assessee's wealth was below the taxable limit and thus taxable at the normal rate was upheld.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad, referred a question of law to the High Court of Gujarat under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The reference concerned the assessment of the assessee, Apak Settlement, for an unspecified assessment year. The dispute revolved around whether the assessee's wealth was below the taxable limit, and consequently, whether it should be taxed at a normal rate instead of the maximum marginal rate. The High Court noted that the facts and the question involved were similar to another case, Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, decided on the same day.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, as a matter of law and fact, the appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee's wealth was below the taxable limit and should be taxed at a normal rate, as opposed to the maximum marginal rate? (Question of law and fact, turning on the interpretation of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 regarding taxable limits and rates). Assessee's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

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 79 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 APAK SETTLEMENT --------------------------------------------------------------

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 →