TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 480X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) has rightly directed the AO to hold that the same required to be brought to Wealth Tax purpose. Accordingly, we uphold the order of the CWT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the assessee on this ground. - W.T.A. Nos. 20-22/Viz/2017 - - - Dated:- 8-12-2017 - Shri D Manmohan, Vice President And Shri D. S. Sunder Singh, Accountant Member Appellant by : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, AR Respondent by : Shri B.C.S.Naik, DR ORDER Per D. S. Sunder Singh, Accountant Member These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) [CWT(A)], Vijayawada dated 14.12.2016 for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, all the appeals are clubbed , heard together and disposed off in a common order for the sake of convenience as under. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal : 1.0. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the orders passed u/s.16(3) r.w.s 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 are contrary to the facts of the case and provisions of law. 1.1. The learned Commissioner of Wealth Tax(A)(in short 'CWT(A)') erred in observing that the vac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers passed by the learned CWT(A) is contrary to the provisions of law and facts of the case and the same needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 3. Ground No.1.0 is not pressed by the assessee, therefore, Ground No.1.0 is dismissed as not pressed. 4. Ground No.1.8 is general in nature which does not require specific adjudication. 5. For the sake of convenience facts are reproduced from the file of Devineni Avinash. The assessee filed return of wealth on 17.09.2010 declaring net wealth at Rs.Nil for the A.Y.2008-09. The assessment was completed u/s 16(3) r.w.s. 17 of Wealth Tax Act on total net wealth of ₹ 6,47,28,860/-. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer (AO) computed the net wealth as under : 1. Property at Enikepadu ₹ 7,50,000 2. Property at Shameerpet ₹ 6,43,860 3. Property at Shaikpet Rs.6,33,35,000 4. Property at Gunadala ITI bus stop Rs. Nil 5. Movable Properties Rs. Nil Total we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31.03.2008, the property was shown as fixed asset in the return of income which indicated that the assessee neither converted into business asset nor any construction activity took place in the relevant period. Therefore, following the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case, for the assessment year 2009-10 in WTA No.1/Vizag/2015 dated 10.06.2016 held that the asset is stock in trade, accordingly upheld the action of the AO in treating the asset as taxable asset . 8. During the appeal proceedings, before the CWT(A), the assessee raised alternate proposition stating that the subject property was in litigation and the city court has granted interim injunction order in OS No.248 of 2003 prohibiting the assessee to make any structures and the city civil court has directed to maintain status quo till further orders. Hence, the Ld.AR argued before the CWT(A) that due to injunction order of civil court in O.S.No.248 of 2003, construction of building is not permissible and the land should not be treated as urban land within the meaning of asset u/s 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act. The CWT(A) did not accept the contention of the assessee. Though the decision of the Tribunal was in favou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The factual matrix of the case which leads to levy of wealth tax is that assessee has purchased a land on 30.7.2007 and on the next day a MOU was entered into with the developer for developing the said land. The A.O. was of the opinion that the land held by the assessee is coming under the definition of urban land as defined u/s 2(ea) of the Act. The A.O. further was of the opinion that the assessee has purchased the land as an investor which was proved by his conduct that he had disclosed the said asset to the department as investment. It is the contention of the assessee that the land held by him is stock in trade which is kept outside the purview of the definition of asset u/s 2(ea) of the Act. The assessee further contended that he had purchased the land for the purpose of commercial exploitation which was evidenced by the fact that he had entered into a JDA on the next day of the purchase of land, therefore, it cannot be considered as asset for the purpose of wealth tax. It was further contended that just because he has disclosed the said lan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is issue in ground no. 1.1. to 1.3 are dismissed. 12. Ground Nos. 1.4 to 1.7 are related to the litigation on the property before the Hon ble Civil Court in OS No.248 of 2003 with an injunction order to maintain status quo till further orders. The Ld.AR was of the view that due to injunction order issued by the Hon ble City Civil Court the assessee is prevented from carrying out construction of building or the development, therefore, the subject land is not coming within the definition of asset u/s 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act. Hence, requested to consider for exclusion of wealth within the definition of section 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act. 13. We have considered the arguments of the both the parties and perused the material placed on record. The above issue has been considered by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of assessee in WTA 1 of 2017 dated 07.09.2017 and the issue is decided against the assessee and in favour of the revenue. For the sake of convenience and clarity, we extract relevant paragraph of the order Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court cited supra. 6. The first question of Jaw that arises for consideration is as to whether the property at Shaikpet, H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aments made of gold, silver, platinum or any other (i) precious metal or any ay containing one or more of such precious metals, whether or not containing any precious or semi-precious stones and whether or not worked or sewn into any wearing apparel;- (ii) precious or semi-precious stores, whether or not set in any furniture, utensils or other article or worked or sewn into any searing apparel; (b) urban and means land situate - (i) In any area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality (whether known as 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; or (ii) in any area within the distance, measured aerially - (i) not being more than two kilometers, from the, local limits of any municipality or cantonment hoard referred to in sub-clause (I) and which has a population of more than ten thousand but not exceeding one lakh ; or (ii) not being more than six kilometers, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in sub-clause (I) and which has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
