CWP No. 8275 of 2017 1 IN HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8275 of 2017 Date of decision: 20.09.2017 Smt. Pushpa Bhatara, D/o Trilochan Dutt, R/o 195-A, Civil Lines, Jalandhar, Punjab, through her legal representatives Sh. Rakesh Bhatara Petitioner Vs. Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax, C.R. Building, Model Town Road, Jalandhar. ..Respondent CORAM: HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent. Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. Prayer in this petition is for quashing order dated 23.02.2017, Annexure P.15, for assessment years 2004-05 to 2011-12 whereby Principal Commissioner has declined to grant refund of wealth tax on ground that prescribed fee of ` 25/- which was required to accompany revision had not been paid. According to petitioner, impugned order is completely arbitrary and contrary to material on record whereby prescribed fee stood paid prior to date of hearing of matter. Further, direction has been sought to respondents to consider and decide application for refund of wealth tax in accordance with retrospective amendment whereby term asset in 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 28-10-2017 09:42:49 ::: CWP No. 8275 of 2017 2 Section 2(ea) of Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (in short, Act ) has been amended to exclude Urban Land with effect from 01.04.1993 in terms of Circular No.11 of 2015. 2. few facts relevant for decision of controversy involved as narrated in petition may be noticed. petitioner is legal heir of Smt. Pushpa Bhatara who filed her wealth tax return for assessment years in question including therein value of Urban Agricultural Land. Vide Finance Act, 2013 definition of term asset in Section 2(ea) of Act was amended retrospectively and Urban Agricultural Land was excluded from said definition. legal heir of Smt. Pushpa Bhatara i.e. Shri Rajeev Bhatara-the present petitioner filed application for refund of wealth tax paid for Urban Agricultural Land for assessment years in question on 10the March, 2014. On 15th January, 2015, petitioner made request for rectification to Wealth Tax Officer Range-II, Jalandhar for assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12. petitioner filed another application for refund of wealth tax for assessment years in question along with revised computation, original computation and proof of agricultural nature of land in form of furd/girdawaris. On 18the January, 2016, letter was received by petitioner regarding date of hearing in office of Principal Commissioner on 28the January, 2016. On that date, matter was adjourned. On 20the May, 2016, it was conveyed to petitioner, that matter stood transferred to Income/Wealth Tax Officer, Ward 3(3) Jalandhar. Copy of application, along with entire record was sent to concerned Officer. On 08th November, 2016, letter was sent to assessee directing him to file reply on 15th November, 2016. In response thereto, petitioner filed copies of Income Tax Returns, Wealth Tax 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 28-10-2017 09:42:50 ::: CWP No. 8275 of 2017 3 Returns, jamabandis and computation of wealth tax on 14th December, 2016. petitioner also deposited fee of ` 25/- for each assessment year on 18th January, 2017 which was required under Section 25 of Act. On 16th February, 2017, letter was received by petitioner stating that prescribed fee of ` 25/- which was required to be paid for maintainability of Revision under Section 25 of Act had not been paid and, thus, he was required to attend office of Principal Commissioner on 23rd February, 2017. entire position for refund of wealth tax for assessment years in question along with claim for refund was again summarized and sent to respondents on 27th January, 2016. According to petitioner, despite payment of ` 25/- which was prescribed fee for entertaining revision petition, respondent dismissed same merely on ground that prescribed payment fee of ` 25/- being pre requisite for filing of application under Section 25 (1) of Act was not deposited. Hence, instant petition by petitioner. 3. We have heard learned counsel for parties. 4. Admittedly, Smt. Pushpa Bhatara filed her Wealth Tax Return for assessment years in question including therein value of Urban Agricultural Land. petitioner being her legal heir filed application for refund of wealth tax paid for Urban Agricultural Land on 10.03.2014 on ground that vide Finance Act, 2013, definition of term asset in Section 2(ea) of Act was amended retrospectively and Urban Agricultural Land was excluded therefrom. petitioner even made request for rectification to Wealth Tax Officer. He also filed application for refund of wealth tax along with revised and original computation. petitioner also deposited fee of ` 25/- for each assessment year. 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 28-10-2017 09:42:50 ::: CWP No. 8275 of 2017 4 5. After hearing learned counsel for parties, perusing averments made in petition and also impugned order dated 23.02.2017, Annexure P.15, passed by Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax, we find that requisite fee of ` 25/- had already been deposited by petitioner before hearing of revision. Under such circumstances, rejection of revision petition by Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax was unjustified. Therefore, order of Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax, dismissing revision petition on ground of non deposit of prescribed fee of ` 25/- is legally unsustainable. Accordingly, present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 23.02.2017, Annexure P.15 is quashed. matter is remitted to Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Jalandhar to decide matter afresh on merits in accordance with law. (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Judge September 20, 2017 (Amit Rawal) gs Judge Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 28-10-2017 09:42:50 ::: Pushpa Bhatara v. Principal Commissioner of Wealth-tax