TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 - - - Dated:- 21-10-2015 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member For the Petitioner : Shri Dipak Sutaria, Sr.DR For the Respondent : Shri M.J. Shah ORDER Per Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member: The present three appeals are directed at the instance of the Revenue against separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Wealth-tax (Appeals)-XIV, Ahmedabad. 2. The WTA No.8/Ahd/2014 is against the order of the ld.CWT(A) dated 10.3.2014 passed for the Asstt.Year 2000-01 and WTA No.10/Ahd/2013 is against the order of the ld.CWT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad dated 25.3.2013 passed for the Asstt.Year 2003-04 under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The ld.AO has passed penalty vide orders dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. He treated this land as urban land and included the value in the taxable net wealth of the assessee. 4. On appeal, the ld.CWT(A) has deleted the addition made by the AO. The finding of the CWT(A) reads as under: 7. I have perused the facts of the appellant's case as gathered and discussed above from wealth asstt.order, Id.CIT(A) order both appellate as well as rectification order and from Hon'ble ITAT order. I have perused the facts as submitted by appellant. I have perused the case laws relied on by appellant. After careful consideration of facts, submission and ratio of various case laws, I am inclined to accept the contention of appellant that land situated at village Ambli, Vejalpur and Makarba are agricultural land a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eafter, change the use, for the first holder the property would not change its character so long as he himself does not change the use or put the land to some other use, after getting the conversion of use from the competent authority / officer. The agri. Land's price per acre or vigha or per square yard, would not be decisive for coming to the conclusion that the land in dispute is agriculture or non agri. If the land is so recorded and it has not been put to any other use by the holder/owner of the land and even if it remains barren or uncultivated for some time and even grass only is raised on the land, it would continue to be an agri. Land. The sale of land at ₹ 175 per sq. yard in the asst. year 79-80 would not change the cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntentions of the ld.CIT-DR. He submitted that the ld.CWT(A) has decided the issue in favour of the assessee and in view of the retrospective amendment, this amount cannot be included in the total wealth of the assessee. 7. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. The Tribunal has recorded the following finding in the Asstt.Year 2007-08: This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-Tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad dated 19.10.2012 for A.Y.2007-2008. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue are as under: 1. The ld.CWT has erred in law and on facts in deleting the additions of ₹ 47,68,180/-, ₹ 68,47,600/- and ₹ 59,84,000/- made in re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n made in Finance Act, 2003 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1993, and therefore, such amendment is applicable in the present year under consideration. The order of the ld. CWT(A) is dated 19.10.2012 which is prior to this retrospective amendment. Hence, we feel it proper that the learned CWT(A) should decide this issue afresh in the light of the retrospective amendment, and hence, we set aside the order of the ld. CWT(A), and restore this matter back to his file for fresh decision in light of the retrospective amendment, as per which clause (ea) of section 2 of Wealth Tax Act, 1957 was amended. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose. 8. There is no dispute on facts. The finding of the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of the ld.CWT(A) for fresh adjudication. We allow the appeal of the Revenue for statistical purpose and the issue regarding levy penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the W.T.Act is restored to the file of the ld.CWT(A) for re-adjudication. 11. It is needless to say that our observation in all these three appeals would not impair or injure the case of the AO or would not cause any prejudice to the explanation of the assessee. The assessee will be at liberty to submit any details or explanation before the ld.CWT(A) in order to explain his case about non-taxability of wealthtax on value of the alleged agriculture land as well as for not visiting him with penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the W.T.Act in both the assessment years. The ld.Firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
