9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1221X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the addition of vacant land to the explanation defining ‘immovable property'? - Held that: - There is no doubt that as on the date of imposition of levy, the appellant had not indulged in any taxable activity. Even when the amendment came into effect and even if retrospectively effective the transaction between the appellant and the lessee could not be described as that of a lease of vacant land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1994. 2. Briefly, the facts are that the M/s Ganesh Benzoplast Ltd entered into an agreement with the appellant for rental of vacant land which was developed by the lessee as a tank farm and the lease was further extended w.e.f. 9 th February 2004. The period in dispute is from 1 st June 2007 to 30 th September 2011. It was on the 1 st June 2007 that 'renting of immovable property&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e taxed in the hands of the appellant from 1 st June 2007 merely because of the retrospective effect of the addition of vacant land to the explanation defining immovable property'. 4. Heard the Learned Authorised Representative and none appeared for appellant. 5. It is seen that the lessee had taken the said land on lease from the appellant and constructed a building thereon. Since the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant had not indulged in any taxable activity. Even when the amendment came into effect and even if retrospectively effective the transaction between the appellant and the lessee could not be described as that of a lease of vacant land. Consequently, the levy of tax on the rental income derived by the appellant from the lessee is beyond the scope of taxability. 7. Accordingly, the impu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
