TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. Since the suit is pending, the value may not be alike freehold land. The pendency of the civil suit would definitely reduce the market price of the land in the open market. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the land in question is an asset within the meaning of sec. 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act and it has to be assessed accordingly under the Wealth-tax Act. - Decided partly in favor of assessee. - W.T.A.No.5/Mds/2015 - - - Dated:- 7-1-2016 - SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri P Radhakrishnan, JCIT For The Respondent : Shri N Anush Shanker, CA ORDER PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal of the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was able to obtain an approach road by negotiating with adjacent land owners during the financial year 2010-11, therefore, if at all the land is to be assessed as an asset, it has to be assessed only in the assessment year 2011-12 and not during the year under consideration. After referring to the pendency of the civil suit, the CWT(A) found that the land in Sowripalayam cannot be treated as an asset within the meaning of sec. 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act. The ld. DR further submitted that what was prohibited is construction of a multistoried building and not a residential building. Referring to sec. 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act, the ld. DR submitted that what was excluded is the land in which construction could not be made. In the case befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has applied for change of the classification as commercial zone since the assessee intended to put up a multistoried commercial complex. According to the ld. Representative, as per the Development Control Regulations, for construction of a multistoried building, the approach road shall be of 9 mtrs, therefore, the assessee was not permitted to construct the building. Since the assessee was not permitted to construct the building, the subject matter of land in question cannot be treated as an asset u/s 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly allowed the claim of the assessee. 4. Referring to the civil suit filed by Smt. V Kamalam against M/s Ramakrishna Industries P. Ltd Others, O.S.No.270 of 2004 before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unless 9 mtrs access road is available, the local authority may not approve the building plan. Admittedly, the assessee has not filed any building plan for approval of the local authority for construction of a residential house. Government Order No.(2T)No.56 dated 11.6.2014 issued by the Housing and Urban Development Department, the copy of which is available at page 47 of the paper book filed by the assessee, demonstrates that the assesseecompany applied for change of the use of the land from residential use to commercial use and the Government accepted the request of the assessee in respect of the land in Sowripalayam 541/2 and 542/1B to the extent of 0.74 acres. Therefore, it is obvious that the land in question was a residential zone f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he year under consideration is construction of a multistoried commercial complex. In fact, the assessee requested for change of classification of the land and the Government accepted the request of the assessee and ordered for conversion of the land into a commercial zone in the year 2014. In view of the above, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that at no stretch of imagination it could be said that construction of a building is not permissible in the land in question. Therefore, the CWT(A) is not justified in saying that construction of a building in the land is not permissible. 7. Admittedly, two civil suits are pending before the subordinate judge, Coimbatore. OS No.270 of 2014 filed by Smt V. Kamalam for herself and on behal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the civil suit would definitely reduce the market price of the land in the open market. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the land in question is an asset within the meaning of sec. 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act and it has to be assessed accordingly under the Wealth-tax Act. However, the value of the property has to be ascertained on the valuation date after taking into consideration the two civil suits pending in respect of the said land. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to value the land under the Wealth-tax Act after considering the pendency of two civil suits before the subordinate judge, Coimbatore. 8. In the result, the appeal of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
