TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the assessee because it is not for us to supply the casus omissus, even if any. In the case of Tarulata Shyam vs. CIT [1977 (4) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court ] held that there is no scope for importing into the statute the words which are not there. Such interpretation would be, not to construe, but to amend the statute. Even if there be a casus omissus, the defect can be remedied only by legislation and not by judicial interpretation.To us, there appears no justification to depart from normal rule of construction according to which the intention of Legislature is primarily to be gathered from the words used in the statute. There is no room for any intendment. There is no equity about a tax. There is no presumption as to a tax. Nothing is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the same was disclosed in the Wealth Tax return for A.Y. 2011-2012. 3. The CWT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of gold and silver ornaments of ₹ 1,96,543 on the ground that there is no proof to show that the same is included in the gold and silver ornaments of ₹ 23,59,948 disclosed in Wealth Tax return for A.Y. 2008-09 in as much as the gold and silver ornaments of ₹ 1,96,543 is in fact included in the value of gold and silver ornaments of ₹ 23,59,948 as evident from the fact that the gold and silver ornaments of ₹ 1,96,543 are valued at market rate as on 31/03/2008 at ₹ 23,59,948 and that the working of valuation is also disclosed in the computation of wealth statement furnished along wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... meaning of section 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth-tax Act. The assessee has submitted that the plot of land was purchased to construct a residential house for herself, but has failed to submit any evidence to establish that she had any relevant permissions from any Competent Authority, during the year under consideration, to construct a residential house on the property. The L/H has failed to furnish evidence in the form of approved plans, construction permits etc. to show that it was building under construction , as claimed by her. By all accounts, the available evidence indicates that it was an open plot of land qualified to be defined as urban land within the meaning of section 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth-tax Act and taxable under the provisions o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the relevant date of valuing wealth for wealth tax purposes. He submits that the land was acquired on 27th March, 2008 and the assessee could not have initiated, leave aside obtain, requisite approvals for constructing the building. He submits that treating such a land as vacant land, for wealth tax purposes, will cause undue hardship to the assessee. In this backdrop, he urges us to treat the land as land occupied by any building which has been constructed with the approval of the appropriate authority and thus excludible from urban land exigible to wealth tax. Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relies upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We are, however, not persuaded by learned counsel s submission. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
