COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX LUDHIANA vs. SUDERSHAN LAL LUDHIANA

ITR/69/1989HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01022605198924 October 2006Author: MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of his share in the land and building owned by the firm, M/S Hind Hosiery Mills, Ludhiana. The Court's decision was based on its order passed in an identical question in W.T.R. Nos. 32 to 37 of 1988 (Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Central), Ludhiana Vs. Shri Kirpal Singh, Ludhiana). In that case, an identical question was decided against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following that precedent, the question referred in the present case was also answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The operative direction is to answer the referred question in favour of the assessee.

What were the facts?

These four Wealth Tax Revision Petitions (W.T.R. Nos. 6 to 9 of 1989) were filed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Central), Ludhiana, against Shri Sudershan Lal, Shri Avinash Chander, Shri Vishva Mittar, and Shri Siri Krishan, all of Ludhiana. The petitions arise from an order dated 23.05.1988 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, in W.T.A. Nos. 292 to 295/87. The assessment year in question is 1981-82. The core of the dispute concerns the assessee's entitlement to a deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of their share in land and building owned by a firm, M/S Hind Hosiery Mills, Ludhiana, in which the assessees are partners. The Revenue is challenging the Tribunal's decision allowing this deduction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in respect of his share in the land and building owned by the firm, styled M/S Hind Hosiery Mills, Ludhiana, in which he is a partner? Assessee's Contention: The assessee contended that they are entitled to the deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) for their share in the firm's property. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue contended that the Tribunal erred in allowing the deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) for the assessee's share in the firm's land and building.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

5(1)(iv)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:24.10.2006 The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Petitioner Versus Shri Sudershan Lal, Ludhiana ...Respondent **** The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Petitioner Versus Shri Avinash Chander, Ludhiana ...Respondent **** The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Petitioner Versus Shri Vishva Mittar, Ludhiana ...Respondent **** The Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Central), Ludhiana ...Petitioner Versus Shri Siri Krishan, Ludhiana ...Respondent **** CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.S.K.Garg Narwana, Advocate for the Revenue. **** -2- JUDGMENT Following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh arising out of its order dated 23.5.1988 passed in W.T.A.Nos. 292 to 295/87, in respect of the assessment year 1981-82. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the Tribunal was right i

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →