TMI Blog1977 (4) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had purchased the land with which we are now concerned situated at Paldi, Ahmedabad, on December 27, 1946, for ₹ 84,999. The other two persons released the entire land in favour of the assessee by release deed dated June 3, 1961. In the sale deed obtained by the assessee the land has been described as agricultural land. By virtue of the exemption granted to agricultural lands under section 2(e), the assessee claimed exemption. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected her plea that the land comes within the meaning of agricultural land and included the value of the land in the net wealth of the assessee for the assessment years 1963-64 to 1970-71. While so including the value of the land in the net wealth of the assessee, the Wealth-tax Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether the land was used for the purpose of agricultural during these assessment years. The assessee had not placed any evidence to show that she had cultivated the land either personally or through tenants between the assessment years 1963-64 and 1968-69. That the land was kept fallow during these years is not in dispute. For the other two assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, we find that there was cultivation by the assessee and juwar and vegetables were grown in those two years. The net income realised in 1969-70 was ₹ 83.25 and for 1970-71 was ₹ 301.35. The land is covered by the Town Planning Scheme of the Ahmedabad Municipality. All round the land, co-operative housing colonies have come up. From the valuer's report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax [1965] 56 ITR 608 (Guj), had occasion to construe the meaning of agricultural land occurring in section 2(e)(i) of the Act. According to the learned judge, whether a land is agricultural land or not cannot depend on the fluctuating or ambulatory intention of the owner of the land. The criterion must be something more definite and more objective, something related to the nature or character of the land and not varying with the intention of the owner as to the use to which he wants to put the land at a particular point of time. The intention as to user is, however, not altogether an irrelevant consideration and is a factor which would bear on the nature or character of the land, but it does not afford a sole or exclusive criterion for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1965] 56 ITR 608 (Guj) and Commissioner of Wealth-tax v. Narandas Motilal [1971] 80 ITR 39 (Guj) were referred to and reviewed by P. D. Desai J., sitting with Bhagwati C. J., as he then was, in Himatlal Govindlal v. Commissioner of Wealth-tax [1977] 106 ITR658(Guj). In that case,the learned judges found on the facts presented before them that the land there was put to agricultural use only by way of stop-gap arrangement till the assessee found ready and willing buyers for the plots and such user of land cannot furnish prima facie evidence about the nature and character of the land. In their view, the totality of circumstances should be taken into consideration. That was a case where after the assessee purchased the land, permission for non- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r that reason that the learned judges expressed the view that the fact that there was a draft town planning scheme or some plots in the land had been sold or that it had been sold on the basis of yardage would not make any difference so far as the character and the nature of the land is concerned by reason of the fact of the land having been cultivated throughout the relevant period. Divan C. J., sitting with B. K. Mehta J., in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Manilal Somnath [1977] 106 ITR 917 (Guj), referred to the earlier cases of this court and held, on the question whether the land in that case was agricultural land, that the fact that the land was within municipal limits or that it was included within a proposed town planning scheme w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ood buyer who could develop it into a housing colony. It is not as if the assessee, for the reason that she could not get a tenant or she could not personally raise some vegetables or some crop on the land, stopped cultivating the land for the six assessment years. The fact that she resumed cultivation in the last two assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71 and realised a meagre income of ₹ 83.25 and ₹ 301.35, respectively, from a very valuable land would clearly bring out her intention that she was not intending to use it as an agricultural land and that she was intending to use it as an agricultural land and that she was only waiting for a proper buyer who would buy for a good price. The Tribunal had before it the tests which thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
