Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.42 seconds)

Commissioner Of Wealth Tax vs Mukund Das Vishnu Kumar Rathi on 25 February, 2003

9. Following the view of their Lordships in the case of T.S. Sundaram (supra), we direct that in computing the net wealth of this assessee under Rule 2 of the WT Rules, 1957, the valuation of the property owned by the firm should be taken into consideration and then apportion the share of assessee which it has in that property and then exemption be granted to it in assessing its individual wealth-tax as per the provisions of Section 5(1)(iv) of the Act.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Cwt vs Mukund Das Vishnu Kumar Rathi on 25 February, 2003

9. Following the view of their Lordships in the case of T.S. Sundaram (supra), we direct that in computing the net wealth of this assessee under rule 2 of the Wealth Tax Rules, 1957 the valuation of the property owned by the firm should be taken into consideration and then apportion the share of assessee which it has in that property and then exemption be granted to it in assessing its individual wealth-tax as per the provisions of section 5(1)(iv) of the Act.
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 7 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Cwt vs Mahabir Prasad Jain on 4 January, 2005

5. We find that the Apex Court in the case of CWT v. T S. Sundaram ( 1999) 237 ITR 61 (SC) has held that the partners are entitled to claim exemption in their individual assessment in respect of the assets of the firm which is exempted under section 5 of the Act. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1