1. This appeal by the assessee is directed on the ground that the AAC erred in holding that jewellery is not covered by the exemption provided in Section 5(1) (xii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ('the Act') for works of art.
2. The assessee claimed that the jewellery belonging to him were exempted under clause (xii) inasmuch as they were works of art. The WTO negatived this claim of the assessee.
3. On appeal to the AAC, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that from the provisions of clauses (viii) and (xiii) of Section 5(1), it was clear that items of jewellery were not included in the list of articles exempted under clause (xii). It was urged that in the absence of any specific provision prohibiting the exemption of jewellery from a charge to wealth-tax under clause (xii), the assessee was entitled to exemption in respect of jewellery which were definitely works of art.
It was submitted that every item of jewellery could be considered to be work of art in view of the fact that professional skill and workmanship had to be employed in producing any piece of jewellery. It was, therefore, claimed that the exemption claimed by the assessee under clause (xii) in respect of jewellery should be given. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee did not find favour with the AAC. He, therefor, concurred with the view taken by the WTO.4. The assessee has carried the matter in further appeal before us. The learned counsel for the assessee, while conceding that the jewellery belonging to the assessee consisted of ornaments made of gold, urged that these items of assets being works of art are eligible for exemption under Section 5(1) (xii). He took us through the meaning assigned to the expression 'works of art' in various dictionaries, for the proposition that the jewellery having been manufactured by the employment of professional skill and fine workmanship have to be regarded as works of art. Reference was made to different law books whereing the meanings assigned to the expression 'works of art' have been given, which are as under : I. Halsubury's Laws of England, volume 9 (fourth edition) :"... An 'artistic work' is a work is any of the following descriptions :(1) the following irrespective of artistic quality, namely paintings, sculptures, drawings, engravings and photographs; (2) works of architecture, being either buildings or models for building; (3) works of artistic craftsmanship not falling into either of the preceding categories ..." Paragraph 842 (p. 537) "... There is no judicially agreed formula of general application for determining whether a works is one of artistic craftsmanship; the word 'artistic' is to be given its ordinary and natural meaning, and it is the function of the court to decide on the evidence in the particular case whether the work is a work of artistic craftsmanship ..." Note 16 (p. 538) II. Jowitt's Dictionary of English Law, volume 1 (second edition), 1977 : "Copyright in works of art now depends on the Copyright Act, 1956, Section 3, which makes the term of protection, the life of the author and fifty years after his death. By Section 3(1) 'artistic work' includes (a) paintings, sculptures, drawings, engravings and photographs, (b) works of architecture, being either buildings or models for buildings, (c) works of artistic craftsmanship not falling within either of the preceding paragraphs." (p. 138) He also invited our attention to the provisions of clauses (viii) and (xii), wherein exemption under Section 5(1) in respect of jewellery has been specifically excluded. The learned counsel for the assessee, contended that Section 5 is not a charging Section but a Section providing for exemption in respect of certain assets while computing the net wealth of the assessee. He submitted that had the intention of the Legislature been to exclude jewellery from the articles of exemption mentioned in clause (xii), it would have been specifically mentioned in this clause too, as has been mentioned in clause (viii) and (xiii) of Section 5(1). He, therefore, submitted that in view of clear provisions of Section 5(1) (xii), the jewellery consisting of ornaments made of gold and/or other precious metals were eligible for exemption, while computing the net wealth of the assessee.
5. The learned departmental representative, on the other hand, contended that the interpretation sought to be placed on behalf of the assessee on the expression 'works of art' occurring in clause (xii) was not correct. He urged that it was an admitted position that the jewellery belonging to the assessee consisted of ornaments made of gold and/or precious metals. He, therefore, submitted that in view of Explanation I to clause (viii), the ornaments made of gold and/or other precious metals were not eligible for exemption even if they could be said to be works of art.
6. We have given our earnest consideration to the submissions made by both the parties before us. Section 5(1) provides that wealth-tax shall not be payable by an assessee on certain assets as specified in clauses (i) to (xxxi). As per Explanation I to clause (viii), ornaments made of gold, silver, platinum or any other precious metal are not entitled to exemption while computing the net wealth of an assessee. Therefore, it has to be presumed that the Legislature has made it clear that ornaments made of gold or any other precious metals are not eligible for exemption under Section 5(1). There is no dispute about the fact that the jewellery belonging to the assessee consisted of ornaments made of gold and or precious metals. Hence in view of clear provisions of Explanation I to clause (viii), it has to be held that the gold ornaments cannot be said to be eligible for exemption even if they are described as works of art. Law is fairly settled that fiscal statutes should not be examined in a petty fogging manner, but broadly with a view to allow the objective of the Section to be fulfilled. Viewed thus, we are of the opinion that the lower authorities were justified in disallowing the assessee's claim for exemption under clause (xii) in respect of the jewellery owned by him.