Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX VS Respondent: MRS. VIMLA TULSIDAS and others
Court Name: Bombay High Court Judge(s): Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, T. D. Sugla Title: COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX vs MRS. VIMLA TULSIDAS and others Case No.: Wealth Tax Reference No, 20 of 1976, Date of Judgment:1990-06-07 Reported As: 1993 PTD 659 Result: Questions answered
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' T. D. SUGLA, J.---The only question of law referred to this Court by the Tribunal under section 27 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, is: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the gold ornaments not studded with precious stones would be exempt under section 5 (1) (viii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, as amended by the Finance (No, 2) Act, of 1971 and not includible in the `net wealth' of each of the assessees for each of the assessm ent year under consideration before the Tribunal?" ' Counsel are agreed that, in view of this Court's decision in the case of CWT v. Smt. Godavaribai R. Podar [19881 169 ITR 245, the word "jewellery" as used in the said clause (viii) of section 5 (1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, cannot, for the period prior to April 1, 1972, be held to include within its embrace ornaments made of gold or silver or platinum or other precious metal or alloy thereof which do not contain precious or semi-precious stone or stones. Since the assessment years involved herein are assessm ent year prior to the asessment year 1972-73, the question of law is, accordingly, answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessees. ' No order as to costs.