COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs. HEIGHT KAVITA TRUST

PDF · subscribers
WTR/257/1996HC GujaratGJHC24022187199629 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 Tribunal was held to be right in directing the Assessing Officer to levy the tax on the assessee trust at the normal rate. The reasoning for this decision is based on the judgment and order delivered in Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, which was decided on the same day. The specific ratio decidendi from the prior judgment is not detailed here, but it led to the affirmation of the Tribunal's direction. The reference stands disposed of accordingly, with no order as to costs.

What were the facts?

This is a Wealth Tax Reference No. 257 of 1996 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The Commissioner of Wealth Tax is the petitioner, and Height Kavita Trust is the respondent. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, has referred a question for the opinion of the High Court under Section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The judgment states 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. The procedural history involves a reference made by the Tribunal to the High Court.

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 levy of Wealth Tax). Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. The judgment relies on the reasoning from a previous case, Wealth Tax Reference No. 43/93, which implies that the arguments in that case are relevant here.

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 257 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 HEIGHT 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 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 →