COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. A M MEYYAMMAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN compliance with the directions of this court, the following common question of law arising out of the assessment of the wealth of the assessee under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the Act"), for the assessment years 1975-76 to 1978-79 has been referred to us for our consideration :

(2.) THE assessment years with which we are concerned are 1975-76 to 1978-79 and the relevant valuation date ended on 12th April each year. THE assessee filed her returns of wealth for the said assessment years wherein she had declared the status to be a person "not ordinarily resident" in India. THE Wealth tax Officer, while completing the assessment, granted the concessional rate at 50 per cent, of tax available to a non-resident under rule 3, Part II of Schedule I to the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, and completed the assessment. Later, the Wealth-tax Officer found that the assessee was a resident and she was not a non-resident. He held that a non resident was alone eligible for the concessional rate provided in the relevant rules and the grant of concession available to a non-resident to the resident assessee was a mistake and hence with a view to rectify the mistake that had crept in the orders of assessment, after granting an opportunity to the assessee, he passed the orders of rectification under Section 35 of the Act by withdrawing the concessional benefit of 50 per cent, of the tax granted in the original assessments. Those orders of rectification were confirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

(3.) THE Wealth-tax Act, in our opinion, makes a clear distinction between a resident-assessee and a non-resident assessee. In so far as resident-assessees are concerned, there is a further sub-classification made between "resident ordinarily resident-assessee" and "resident not ordinarily resident-assessee", but both classes of assessee would fall within the scope of the expression, "resident-assessee". THE assessee by showing her status to be a resident but not ordinarily resident, had declared that she was not a non-resident assessee during the relevant valuation dates, and on her own showing, she is not eligible for the rebate of tax granted under the orders of assessment. THE concession available to a non-resident granted by the Wealth-tax Officer to a resident-assessee is a mistake apparent from the record and when the Wealth-tax Officer examined the records of the assessee in the light of the provisions of the relevant rules, the mistake would be apparent from the record, as the mistake committed by the Assessing Officer is an obvious one. It is a patent mistake and no long drawn process of reasoning is required to establish the mistake. Equally, no debatable point of law is involved to find out the mistake.