2019 (6) TMI 937 - HC - Wealth-tax

Wealth tax assessment - revision application filed under Section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act - whether the properties in question are agricultural lands at the relevant time? - assessee for the first time before this Court, raised such a plea that the lands are agricultural lands without specifically pleading so in the revision application filed under Section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act - HELD THAT - In the light of new plea, it is also noticed that learned counsel for writ petitioner fairly submits that the writ petitioner's case pertains to assessment year 2008-09 and subsequently in 2011, the land in question has been converted qua use. This statement is also noticed, which means, post 2011, there will be no claim by the writ petitioner under said Act. Order - The impugned order made by the first respondent is set aside. Though obvious, it is made clear that impugned order is set aside solely for the purpose of facilitating the authority to hear afresh (in the light of new plea raised by writ petitioner). First respondent is directed to hear the revision afresh in the light of the additional/new plea which the writ petitioner has raised, i.e., plea that the land in question is agricultural land. It is made clear that all pleas, arguments and questions pertaining to the agricultural land new plea of the writ petitioner are left open to be agitated before the first respondent revisional authority and the revisional authority shall consider the same and decide on the same in accordance with law. The revisional authority shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the writ petitioner before passing orders afresh. Entire aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge to order under Section 25 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 regarding classification of land as agricultural or urban.

Analysis:
The case involved a writ petition challenging an order made under Section 25 of 'The Wealth Tax Act, 1957' regarding the classification of land. The impugned order was set aside to allow the authority to reconsider the matter in light of a new plea raised by the writ petitioner regarding the land being agricultural. The court refrained from expressing an opinion on the new plea and directed the revisional authority to hear the revision afresh considering the new plea. The writ petitioner's case pertained to the assessment year 2008-09, and it was noted that the land had been converted for a different use in 2011. The court ordered the revisional authority to consider all arguments related to the new plea and provide an opportunity for a personal hearing to the writ petitioner before passing fresh orders. The entire process was to be completed within three months from the date of the court's order, and a copy of the decision was to be served to the writ petitioner within seven working days.

This judgment highlighted the importance of factual disputes in the case, the definition of 'assets' under the Act, and the significance of the new plea regarding the classification of the land. The court's decision to set aside the impugned order was solely to facilitate a fresh hearing based on the new plea raised by the writ petitioner. The timeline provided for the completion of the process ensured a swift resolution of the matter.