Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs Udai Saroj Shah and Arun Prakash Shah

B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.—The question referred u/s 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in this case roads as under :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances, on a correct interpretation of Section 5(1)(viii) read with Explanation 1 of the Wealth-tax Act, unstudied ornaments of precious metals fall within the purview of the term ''jewellery'' or not ?"

This issue has been settled by a division Bench of this court in Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. His Highness Maharaja Vibhuti Narain Singh, . It has been held by the Division Bench that even prior to the introduction of Explanation 1 in Clause (viii) of Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Wealth-tax Act, the expression "jewellery" included unstudied jewellery also.

In view of the said decision, the question referred is answered in the following words :

"Unstudded ornaments made of precious metals fall within the purview of the expression ''jewellery'' occurring in Section 5(1)(viii) of the Wealth-tax Act."

Answered accordingly. No costs.