9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 695X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals are identical, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The assessees have raised common grounds of appeal in all the appeals. However, the common grounds of appeal raised in WTA No.12 are reproduced as under: 1. That the order of the Ld. CWT(Appeals), Jalandhar is against the law and facts of the case. 2. That the Ld. CWT(Appeals) had gravely erred in law in failing to appreciate that agricultural lands , whether situated within the Urban aglomeration or within the notified area limits would not falll within the Scope Domain of the terminology Asset as contemplated u/s 2(ea)(v) of the W.T.Act, 1957. 3. That the Ld. CWT(Appeals) gravely e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eme Curt, Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court, Entry 86 Entry 97 as is so contemplated in the Union List of the Constitution of India and the Circular of the CBDT substantiating the assessee s contention. 5. That the CWT(Appeals) gravely erred in law that vide the Finance Act, 1992, the then Finance Minister had specifically brought only non-productive assets within the ambit of Wealthtax Act,1957 and by no stretch of imagination agricultural land i.e. land on in which agricultural operations are being carried on, whether situated within or outside the urban areas could be held in our Indian economy as a non-productive assts . 6. That without prejudice to the aforesaid settled position of law, the ld. CWT (Appeals) still fu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to repeat the same for the sake of convenience. 4. At the time of hearing both the parties agreed that the issue in dispute has already been adjudicated and finally decided against the assessee by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Gurdip Singh Nagra vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax , Jalandhar and others in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s). 30267/2011, arise from the judgment and order dated 06/04/2011 in WTA No.38/2010 of the Hon ble High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh, which the assessee has attached at page 3 4 of the small paper book containing pages 1 to 13. 5. In addition to the said admitted position, the Ld. counsel for the assesse also stated that the assessee has raised ground No.3, in which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Jurisdictional High Court, vide its consolidated order dated 16.12.2011. The issue in dispute in the present appeals is exactly similar, which has attained finality. Therefore, respectfully following the order of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, dated 16.12.2011, the present appeals filed by the assessees are dismissed. 8. As regards the other issue raised by the ld. counsel for the assessee regarding challenging the vires of the levy of Wealth Tax on agricultural land, as stood contemplated under section 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction/power to adjudicate regarding vires of levy of Wealth Tax on agricultural land, as stated by the assessee in ground No.3. 9. Keeping in view the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
