TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GH COURT] .Thus, considering that factually, the CITA on verification found that the land falls within the prohibited zone CRZ III category. - Decided against the revenue. - Tax Case Appeal No.908 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 14-10-2020 - Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan For the Appellant : M/s.K.G.Usharani Junior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan JUDGMENT T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J. This appeal, filed by the Revenue under Section 27A of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 [hereinafter referred to as the Act ] is directed against the order dated 19.02.2016 in WTA.No.7/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax payable thereon. 5.We have perused the assessment order dated 20.12.2013 and we find that the assessee has specifically raised the issue that the land in question would not come within the ambit of asset as defined under Section 2(ea) of the Act. The assessee carried the matter by way of an appeal to the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore [CWT(A)]. Even before the CWT(A), the assessee had raised the specific issue with regard to the issue that the asset will not come within the definition of Section 2(ea) of the Act. Apart from that, the assessee also stated that the CMDA by letter dated 17.04.2012 have stated that no construction can put up on the land as 100 ft road has been proposed to be formed in those lands and o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation, the assessee has been informed that the site under reference lies in the IT corridor and CRZ-II within 100m from Buckingham Canal and the street alignment of proposed 30.5m (100ft) road to ECR is passing through the said survey number. Land use assigned as per FMB has been furnished to the applicant/assessee. Further, it has been stated that any sub-division or construction of building or development in the land in question is not valid in law unless planning permission is applied for and duly granted for subdivision, construction or development. Therefore, as on date, the assessee cannot put up any construction on the said property. More or less, an identical issue came up for consideration before this Court in the case of The Princ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vited to Board's Circular No.3 of 2018 dated 11.07.2018 (hereinafter, referred to as the Circular ) vide which monetary limits for filing of income tax appeals by the Department before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, High Courts and SLPs/appeals before Supreme Court were specified. Para 11 of the Circular states that the monetary limits specified in para 3 shall not apply to writ matters and Direct tax matters other than Income tax and filing of appeals in such cases shall continue to be governed by relevant provisions of statute and rules. 2.There is no charge under Wealth Tax Act, 1957 w.e.f 1st April, 2016. Therefore, as a step towards litigation management, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also with effect from 05.02.2019. In the light of the above circular, the substantial questions of law Nos.1 and 2 are answered against the revenue. 6.Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant / revenue contended that the Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeals on the ground of law tax effect without taking note of the fact that the revenue audit objection is there in the assessee's case and therefore, the cases would come within the exemption culled out in the circular. 7.It is not clear what is the revenue audit objection in the instant matter. Nevertheless, we have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the merits of the matter. The issue pertains to valuation of a property in Neelankarai villag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in the instant cases and therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the appeals filed by the revenue. As mentioned above, the substantial question of law no.3 raised by the revenue is, stating that the Tribunal ought not to have rejected the revenue's appeal on the ground of low tax effect, without noting the revenue audit objection. Since we have decided in favour of the assessee on merits, substantial question of law no.3 does not arise for consideration. 11.For the above reasons, the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed against the revenue and substantial question of law nos.1 and 2 are answered against the revenue and substantial question of law no.3 is held to be unnecessary in the facts and circumstances. 7.In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
