Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + AT Wealth-tax - 2022 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 673 - AT - Wealth-taxWealth tax assessment - land sold by the assessee was an agricultural land or capital asset - HELD THAT:- Respectfully following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in income tax matter [2019 (1) TMI 1989 - ITAT CHENNAI] as well as amendment to sub-clause (b) of Explanation 1 to clause (ea) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, we are inclined to uphold the view of the ld. CIT(A) that the land sold by the assessee was an agricultural land and not a capital asset. Therefore, the gain on sale thereof was not exigible to tax. Thus, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed for all the assessment years under consideration. Assessing the property at Velachery as ‘Urban land’ liable to Wealth Tax - CIT(A) has observed that the land at Velachery cannot be construed as an “Urban land” under section 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth Tax Act for the reason that after obtaining proper planning permission, the building was constructed and the assessee has sold the built-up area from the assessment year 2010-11 to 2014-15. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made to wealth in the assessment year 2010-11. See GIRIDHAR G. YADALAM case [2016 (1) TMI 826 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it was held that when the property was given for development, unless the building is completed, it will not be construed as “building” and have liable for wealth tax as urban land. Charging of interest under section 17B of the Wealth Tax Act - Admittedly, in the present case, the assessee has not filed the wealth tax return under section 14 or 15 or under section 17 and moreover, the assessment was made for the first time. Hence, we reverse the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and allow the ground raised by the Revenue.
|