Surinder Kaur v. C.I.T., Bhatina
[Citation -2017-LL-1113-19]
| Citation | 2017-LL-1113-19 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | Surinder Kaur |
| Respondent Name | C.I.T., Bhatina |
| Court | SUPREME COURT |
| Relevant Act | Wealth-tax |
| Date of Order | 13/11/2017 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | agricultural land • urban land • agricultural purpose |
| Bot Summary: | The present cases concern the wealth-tax payable by the assessee for the year 1994-1995. The assessee has not succeeded through out including at the High Court judgment stage for the reason that the definition of Urban Land which is contained in Section 2(ea), Explanation(b), would include any area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality, a Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SHASHI SAREEN Date: 2017.11.15 notified town area committee etc. Since the land of the 16:48:33 IST Reason: assessee is an agricultural land being used for agricultural purposes, but was land which was comprised 2 within the jurisdiction of a municipality, it was held to be an Urban land and becomes taxable under the Wealth-tax Act. An amendment has since been made to the Wealth Tax Act by the Amending Act 17 of 2013 w.e.f. 01.04.1993. The amendment now clarifies that urban land does not include land classified as agricultural land in the records of the Government and used for agricultural purposes. Since we are concerned with the assessment year 1994-95, the land that the assessee holds is clearly covered by this retrospective clarificatory amendment. Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following ORDER Leave granted. |