MEGHRAJ TUSNIAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the assessee, the following three questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the Act") :

(2.) THE assessee, Meghraj Tusnial and Brij Ratan Tusnial and their other brothers and widowed mother inherited the immovable and movable properties from their late father and husband, N.D. Tusnial. For the assessment year 1981-82, for their assessment for wealth-tax originally completed on December 17, 1983, they disclosed their wealth at Rs. 6,74,970 and Rs. 7,96,000 of Meghraj Tusnial and Brij Ratan Tusnial. But the Wealth-tax Officer computed the same at Rs. 20,22,961 and Rs. 20,51,000, respectively.

(3.) THERE is no quarrel regarding the proposition of law that in case the assessment of the assessee is below 70 per cent. and the announcement of the value of the wealth, it will be normally presumed that the person shall be deemed to have furnished the assets under the meaning of Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 18 unless he proves the filing of assets as returned by him. As per Explanation 4 to Sub-section (1) of Section 18 when the value of the net asset in the return is less than 70 per cent. then it is to be deemed with such person. In this case, such person shall be deemed to have been incorporated in this matter. THEREafter, the assessee may also prove that the value of the asset as disclosed by him in the return is correct. The assessee may prove it by giving particulars regarding valuation. The Wealth-tax Officer, therefore, has an obligation to examine as to whether it is correct or not. THEREfore, it is the statutory duty of the Wealth-tax Officer and for that matter, the Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to find out the valuation given by the assessee for the asset is not correct. The Tribunal, in conclusion of the order, has, however, stated as follows :