IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
A.M. Ahmadi, B.S. Kapadia, JJ.
Commissioner of Wealth-Tax - Petitioner
Versus
Shri Kasturbhai Mayabhai - Respondent
Wealth-tax Reference No. 31 of 1983
Decided On : 06-11-1985
WEALTH TAX - Rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 - Retrospective effect - Whether rule 1BB is substantive or procedural in nature - Held, that rule 1BB is merely procedural and, therefore, retrospective.
Fact of the Case:
The assessee owns a property in the City of Ahmedabad known as " K.M. Residences ". The question of valuation of this estate was referred to the Valuation Officer by the Wealth-tax Officer. On receipt of the order from the Valuation Officer, under sub-section (5) of section 16A of the Act, the Wealth-tax Officer proceeded to assess the wealth-tax in conformity with the estimate of the Valuation Officer.
Finding of the Court:
Rule 1BB is merely procedural and, therefore, retrospective.
Issues: Whether rule 1BB of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957 is substantive or procedural in nature.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 7(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 read with rule 1BB provides the machinery for estimating the market value of a house used wholly or mainly for residence. 2. Rule 1BB is wider in scope in that it does not use the expression " exclusively used by him " but merely states that the house must be wholly or mainly used for residential purposes. 3. Rule 1BB provides a set formula on the basis whereof the market value of a house can be worked out for the purpose of assessing the tax. 4. The rule of construction depends upon whether the law is substantive or merely procedural. 5. If the law affects vested rights, interests and/or obligations, it is substantive. 6. If it touches matters of procedure only, it is adjective. 7. In the case of a law which is substantive, the presumption is that it is not intended to be retrospective unless the said presumption is dislodged by express language employed by the Legislature or by necessary implication. 8. In the case of a law which is procedural, the presumption is in favour of retrospectivity. 9. Rule 1BB merely indicates a method or formula for determining the value of a house used wholly or mainly for residence and can, therefore, be said to be purely procedural.
Final Decision: The question posed for our opinion is answered in the affirmative accordingly. The reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT :
A.M. Ahmadi, J.
The Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter called " the Act "), was enacted to provide for the levy of wealth-tax and came into force with effect from April 1, 1957. The charging provision, section 3, provides for the levy of wealth-tax in respect of the net wealth of every individual, Hindu undivided family and company at the specified rates. The expression " net wealth " is defined in section 2(m) as the amount by which the aggregate value computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act of all the assets, wherever located, belonging to the assessee on the valuation date, including assets required to be included in his net wealth as on that date under the Act, is in excess of the aggregate value of all the debts owed by the assessee on the valuation date other than debts exempted by section 6, debts which are in the nature of encumbrances on any property which is not chargeable under the Act or the amount of tax, penalty or interest payable pursuant to an order passed under the Act or any other law relating to taxation. Section 4 enumerates the assets to be included in computing the net wealth. Sections 5 and 6 exempt certain assets in India and outside India from being included in computing the net wealth of the taxpayer. The value of assets is to be determined in accordance with section 7, sub-section (1) whereof reads as under :
2. The words " subject to any rules made in this behalf " were substituted by the Wealth-tax (Amendment) Act, 1964, with effect from April 1, 1965. Sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) of section 7 are in the nature of exceptions to sub-section (1) and each one of them begins with a non obstante clause, viz., notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1). Sub-section (2) deals with the manner in which the assets of an assessee carrying on business in respect whereof regular accounts are maintained or a nonresident company are to be computed. We are not concerned with this sub-section but sub-sections (3) and (4) of section 7 are relevant for our purpose and may, therefore, be reproduced :
(4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), the value of a house belonging to the assessee and exclusively used by him for residential purposes throughout the period of twelve months immediately preceding the valuation date may, at the option of the assessee, be taken to be the price which, in the opinion of the Wealth-tax Officer, it would fetch if sold in the open market on the valuation date next following the date on which he became the owner of the house or on the valuation date relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1971, whichever valuation date is later."
3. Section 14 enjoins every person, if his assessable net wealth on the valuation date is of such an amount as to render him liable to wealth-tax, to furnish a return in the prescribed form. On receipt of the return, the Wealth-tax Officer may make a provisional assessment under section 15C or proceed to make a final assessment in accordance with section 16 of the Act. According to that section, if the Wealth-tax Officer is satisfied that the return made by the assessee is correct and complete, he may finalise the assessment accordingly; otherwise he may after giv
Anant Gopal Sheorey v. State of Bombay
CIT v. Isthmian Steamship Lines
CWT v. Maharaj Kumar Kamal Singh
Harish Chandra Bajpai v. Triloki Singh
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.