9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- 29-2-2012 - I.P. BANSAL, K.D. RANJAN, JJ. Ankit Gupta for the Appellant. S. Mohanty for the Respondent. ORDER K.D. Ranjan, Accountant Member These appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2005-06 to 2008-09 arises out of separate orders of Ld CWT (A), Muzaffarnagar. All these appeals were heard together and for the sake of convenience are being disposed off by this common order. 2. The grounds of appeals raised by the assessee are identical in all the four years except the difference in amounts raised by the assessee in these years are same. For the sake of convenience, the grounds of appeal in assessment year 2005-06 are reproduced as under:- 1. That the notice issued u/s 17 is illegal, bad in law and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sustained. 8. That appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and /or delete any of the above grounds of appeal or before the time of hearing. 3. The first issue for consideration relates to issue of notice u/s 17 of the W.T. Act, 1957. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the Assessing Officer initiated proceedings u/s 17 of the WT Act by issue of notice on 25.3.2010. The assessee did not file returns of wealth within the time allowed under notice u/s 17 of the Act. The Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 16(2) of the WT Act on 22.11.2010 fixing the date of hearing on 17.11.2010. The assessee filed returns of wealth on 15.12.2010 declaring net wealth as under:- Assessment year Amount 2005-06 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gone through the material available on record. In this case, the assessee had not advanced any arguments before ld CWT(A). Hence, he had dismissed the ground of appeal relating to issue of notice u/s 17 of the Act. Before us the ld AR of the assessee had taken altogether a different argument relating to issue of notice u/s 16(2) of the Act without taking any additional ground of appeal. Issue of notice u/s 17 and issue of notice u/s 16(2) are entirely two different issues. Since the assessee had not advanced any arguments before CWT(A) against reopening of assessment u/s 17 of the WT Act, we are of considered view that the arguments involving investigation of facts and law cannot be taken before the Tribunal. Accordingly, we do not find an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s submitted that agriculture activities were carried on the land till date of sale. Even today no Dakhil Kharij was changed in revenue record. The assessee filed copies of certificates issued by Nagar Palika Shamli and revenue Inspector in support of the status of land. The Ld CWT(A) obtained the comments of Assessing Officer. Ld CWT(A) also directed the Assessing Officer to make enquiries from Tehsildar Shamli to ascertain the genuineness of the certificates issued by the Amin, the revenue official. The Assessing Officer obtained the report from Tehsildar Shamli who reported that Amin had no power to give such report. It was also clarified that his report given earlier should be treated as genuine. The assessee was asked to give the commen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re income. He also took note of the fact that in a case where agriculture lands are sold by converting into plots, the broker takes permission of land use which normally takes considerable time in completing of sale of all the plots and during the period the land would remained vacant. Since the assessee could not establish that impugned land was agriculture in nature by authentic documentary evidence, the Ld CWT(A) came to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was justified in assessing the agriculture land u/s 2(ea) of the WT Act, 1957. He, accordingly, upheld the stand taken by the Assessing Officer. 9. Before us Ld AR of the assessee submitted that the impugned lands were agriculture lands and agriculture crops were grown thereo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not permissible under any law for the time being in force in the area in which such land is situated or the land occupied by any building which has been constructed with the approval of the appropriate authority or any unused land held by the assessee for industrial purposes for a period of two years from the date of its acquisition by him or any land held by the assessee as stock-in-trade for a period of ten years from the date of its acquisition by him." We may also like to mention that with effect from 1st April, 1993, the definition of asset has changed. Prior to it, the agriculture lands were exempt from wealth tax. Therefore from 1.4.1993, any urban land whether it is agriculture land or otherwise is liable to wealth tax if it fall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
