TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... distance. "Net wealth" means the amount by which the aggregate value computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act of all the assets, wherever located belonging to the assessee on the valuation date, including assets required to be included in his net wealth as on the date under this Act, is in excess of the aggregate value of all the debts owned by the assessee on the date of value which have been incurred in relation to the said assets. The net wealth is chargeable to tax. In the assessee’s case the net wealth tax that a land situated in any area which is comprised within jurisdiction of a Municipality or a cantonment board and which has a population of not less than ten thousand according to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published before the valuation date and land situated within 8 kms from the local limits of such municipalities or cantonment as the Central Government may specify. In the case of assessee the valuation date is 31st March, 2005 and the last census preceding this date is that in 2001. The land containing Survey Nos.15,16,17,18,20,21 and 22 is situated in Village Panchayat Siridao, Goa. As per certificate t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asset within the meaning of section 2(e)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act. Therefore, considering the costs of land the Assessing Officer has computed the net Wealth Tax and he has estimated the Market Value at 40,00,00,000/- and taxable wealth was assessed. 4. The matter carried to CIT(A) and CIT(A) has deleted the Wealth Tax by observing as under: 7. I have gone through the assessment order and arguments of the learned counsel of the appellant. There is no difference of opinion as far as facts of this case is concerned between the A.O. and the appellant. The facts, as narrated by the A.O, in the assessment order itself, can be summarized as under: i) The appellant company, as is evident from the name itself was incorporated on 25.02.2004 with the intention of running a school of International standards. ii) The appellant company, as is purpose purchased a plot of land called cono situated at siridao- palem, Tiswadi Taluka on 08.03.2004. iii) This land is within 8 kms. from the municipal limits of Panaji Municipa1ity. iv) This land was converted into stock-in-trade during financial year ending on 31.03.2006 i. e. F. Yr. 2005-06. v) Since the appellant company enco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his own at ₹ 40 Crores without referring the same to the Departmental Valuation Officer for determining its market value as per Schedule III Part H referred by Sec 7 of the Wealth Tax Act. The AO has erred in not giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and valuing the land at much higher amount than the amount as per valuation report obtained by the Company from a registered valuer. b) The AO has not given deduction of the unsecured loans of ₹ 5.33 crs taken for the purpose of buying the land. The same loans are reflected in the Audited Balance Sheet as at 31st March 2005. Additional Ground in Cross Objection: The learned A.O. has erred in considering the land situated at survey No. 16,17,18,20,21/- and 22 in village Siridao-Goa as urban land and levying wealth tax thereon. The said land is not an urban land as the same is not situated in a notified area having population of more than 1000 as also not having been situated within a distance of 8 Kms. from a notified Municipal area . 6. During the course of hearing the learned AR has raised the additional cross objection before us and he has submitted that the additional ground goes to the root ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional ground. 8. The learned AR has filed the written submission before us. In the written submission the assessee has submitted as per the section-3 of Wealth Tax Act, the net wealth of a person is chargeable in wealth tax. Section-2 (m) defines Net Wealth as per amount by which the aggregate value of assets, belonging to an assessee, is in excess of all the debts owned by the assessee. Section 2 (ea) of the Wealth Tax 1957 categorises the assets into 6 clauses. Sub-section (v) of section 2 (ea) considered the urban land as an assets. Explanation-1 (B) of Section 2 (ea) considers urban land as an asset. i) any area which is comprised within the Jurisdiction of a municipality (Where known as a municipality, municipal corporation, notified area committee, town area committee, town committee or by any other name) or a cantonment board and which has a population of not less than ten thousand according to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published before the valuation date and ii) Land situated within 8 kms from the local limits of such municipalities or cantonment as the Central Government may specify. The valuation date is 31st March, 2005 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r by any other name) or a cantonment board and which has a population of not less than ten thousand according to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published before the valuation date and ii) Land situated within 8 kms from the local limits of such municipalities or cantonment as the Central Government may specify. In the instant case the valuation date is 31st March, 2005 and the last census preceding this date 2001, Further land containing Survey No. 15,16,17,18,20,21 and 22 is situated in village Panchayat Siridaon, Goa, Goa. The population of the Sridao Village is according to census of 2001 is 2872, which is less than 1 thousand. The figure of population is confirmed by the certificate which read as under: Population Certificate: Sir, I am to refer your letter dated 03/05/2014 and to furnish herewith the required information as under: Name of Village Population (as per Census-2001) Person Male Female Siridao 2872 1410 1462 Yours Faithfully (Mallikarju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be the aerial distance. CIT vs. Santinder Pal Singh 188 Taxman 54 (Punj Har.) Laukik Developers vs. Dy. CIT 105 ITD 657 (Mumbai) Shri Prakash Laxminarayan Vs. ACIT, Cir-5(Nagpur) ITO vs. Ashok Shukla, decided in ITA No. 207/Indore/2012 We find that the agricultural land has been defined in Section 2(14) (b) of which read as under: [(iii) agricultural land in India, not being land situate- (a) in any area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality (whether known as a municipality, municipal corporation, notified area committee, town area committee, town committee, or by any other name) or a cantonment board and which has a population4 of not less than ten thousand [according to the last preceding census of which the relevant figures have been published before the first day of the previous year] ; or (b) in any area within the distance, measured aerially,- (I) not being more than two kilometres, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in item (a) and which has a population of more than ten thousand but not exceeding one lakh; or (II) not being more than six kilometres, from the local limits of any m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the State of Punjab, at item No. 18, the Sub-Division, Khanna has been listed at serial No. 19. It has, inter alia, been specified that area up to 2 kms. from the municipal limits in all directions has to be regarded other than agricultural land. Once the statutory guidance of taking into account the extent and scope of urbanization of the area has to be reckoned while issuing any such notification then it would be incongruous to the argument of the Revenue that the distance of land should be measured by the method of straight line on horizontal plane or as per crow's flight because any measurement by crow's flight is bound to ignore the urbanization which has taken place. Moreover, the judgment of the Mumbai Bench appears to have attained finality. Keeping in view the principle of consistency as laid down in Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT [1992] 193 ITR 321 (SC) we are of the view that the opinion expressed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference of this Court. Accordingly question No. 1 is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by upholding the order of the Tribunal. Looking to the above facts and circumstances o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
