TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 2(ea) of the Act clearly specified that any land held by assessee as stock in trade for a period of 10 years from the date of acquisition will not be included in the definition of Urban Land . ITAT also held that as per Section 2(m) of Wealth Tax Act, while determining the wealth tax liability of Respondent, the aggregate value of debt owed by Respondent in respect of assets owned by Respondent have to be reduced from the aggregate value of asset belonging to Respondent. Having considered impugned order of ITAT and also the order of AO as well as CIT(A), in our view, the Tribunal has not committed any perversity or applied incorrect principles to the given facts and when the facts and circumstances are properly analyzed and correc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Hon ble ITAT erred in not appreciation the provisions of section 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act, 1957 which is totally applicable as per the facts of this case ? E] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT erred in deleting the addition without adjudication of facts brought out by the AO in para 6.3 of the assessment order that the said land was given to the assessee by the State Government of Maharashtra as an Industrial land to set up the Industry namely Special Township and Tourism Project . Hence, it cannot be treated as stock in trade ? 2. The primary question based on submissions of Mr. Walve which would required adjudication is whether the piece of land in Panvel held by Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer did not accept the contention of Respondent and held that any land which was acquired for industrial purpose, does not form part of stock in trade as the same remained unused for two years, and it will form part of wealth of Respondent. The Assessing Officer further held that Respondent was not a dealer in land who is engaged in business of buying and selling of land and the land acquired by Respondent can not be considered as an inventory. 5. This finding of the Assessing Officer was challenged by Respondent before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to CIT (A) ). CIT(A) after considering the submissions of Respondent observed that if Respondent had to develop the special township, it would definitely ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e determining the wealth tax liability of Respondent, the aggregate value of debt owed by Respondent in respect of assets owned by Respondent have to be reduced from the aggregate value of asset belonging to Respondent. 7. Having considered impugned order of ITAT and also the order of Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A), in our view, the Tribunal has not committed any perversity or applied incorrect principles to the given facts and when the facts and circumstances are properly analyzed and correct test is applied to decide the issue at hand, then, we do not think the questions as proposed raises any substantial question of law. 8. The appeal is devoid of merits and it is dismissed with no order as to costs. 9. In view of above, We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
