9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (9) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the dispute relates to the valuation of land measuring 1,544 sq. mtrs. which in fact is a strip of land and which was under reservation. A site plan of the said property was submitted in the paper book at page 14. He further submitted that such strip of land under reservation and partly land under road widening was unsaleable for any purpose whatsoever. He further invited our attention towards the report given by the approved valuer for valuation of this property. At page 9 of the said report given by the approved valuer, the details of aforesaid land measuring 1544 sq. mtrs. has been given as under: (a) Land under part reservation 1,011.77 sq.mts. (b) Land under road widening 532.61 sq. mts. At page 12 the approved valuer has considered the impact of the provisions of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. After considering the entire relevant factors including the impact of ceiling laws, the approved valuer had valued the said property as under: 1. Market value of sub/plot No. 1 of 690 sq. mts. @ Rs. 54 per sq. mt. Rs. 37,260.00 2. Value of 1/6th of common plot area, i.e., 68.15 sq. mts. @ Rs. 54 per sq. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recent decision taken by us in WTA No. 750/Ahd/1988 dt. 1st Sept., 1989. However, since the AAC has upheld the rate of Rs. 15 per sq. metre for valuation of the land measuring 1,544 sq. mtrs. in dispute, we confirm the findings given by the AAC on this point. Accordingly ground No. 1 taken by the Revenue in these appeals fails. 3. Ground Nos. 2 and 3 are common for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 which are reproduced hereunder: "2. The learned AAC has erred in law and on facts in holding that as on the relevant valuation date it cannot be said that the assessee had either the actionable claim or actual land in her possession or the right to compensation in respect of land at Panchpakhadi Village, when she received compensation of Rs. 1,90,400 on agitation of Rs. 1,90,400 on agitation of ownership. 3. The learned AAC has further erred in law and on facts in holding that the compensation of Rs. 1,90,440 received in respect of the land at Thane was only "ex-gratia payment" and in directing the WTO to take the value of the said land at Rs. Nil." 3.1. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the AAC erred in holding that compensation received by the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad already constructed public reads and thus the said land came in possession of Municipal Council in the year 1960-63. He further contended that when the assessee became aware somewhere in the year 1978-79, she submitted representations to the concerned authorities. Merely making a claim for grant of some compensation in respect of land which had already been acquired by Thane Municipal Council in the year 1960-63, cannot be treated as wealth liable to tax in the hands of the assessee until the claim was accepted and the amount was received by the assessee. The learned counsel argued that the Thane Municipal Council became owner of the said land not only by virtue of the orders passed by the Collector (competent authority) but they also became owner by virtue of adverse possession over the said land as they were using the said land for construction of road, etc., openly and such open and undisputed user of the land by Thane Municipal Council constituted title in favour of the Thane Municipal Council by adverse possession in their favour. The learned counsel contended that the assessee's right to receive any compensation had already become barred by limitation of time as she had lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter dt. 30th Oct., 1951 informed the Maharaja of Dholpur that the "Dholpur House" would be considered to be the property of the Rajasthan State but 1/3rd of the rental value would be paid to His Highness as a purely ex gratia arrangement and, in the event of sale of the House H.H. would be entitled to 1/3rd of the sale price minus share of the Government of India in the form of 75 per cent incremental value. On these facts, it was held by the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court that the assessee cannot be considered to possess any property or any right to property by virtue of the arrangement arrived at by the Government of India because everything was ex gratia. In view of these submissions, the learned counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee was not the owner of the land within the meaning of provisions of the WT Act on the relevant valuation dates pertaining to asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 an the AAC was fully justified in directing the WTO to take 'nil' value of the aforesaid property on the said valuation dates. 3.3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned representative of both sides and have also gone through the orders passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue which can be said to be liable to wealth-tax. The assessee became entitled to receive compensation only when the said amount of compensation was finally determined by the concerned authorities and prior to that date the assessee cannot be held to be liable to pay wealth tax on the value of such land. The AAC had, therefore, rightly directed the WTO to take Nil value. For asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78. In view of the above discussions ground Nos. 2 and 3 in Revenue's appeals for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 are also decided against the Department and the order passed by the AAC in this regard is confirmed. 4. Ground No. 4 in the appeals for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 reads as under; "The learned AAC has erred in law and on facts in directing the WTO to take the value of Rs. 40,000 in respect of land of 29,416 sq. yds. at Village Navapada." 4.1. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the assessee had shown the value of following lands at Rs. 40,000; (a) Land at village Navapada 29,416 sq. yds. (b) Land at village Panchapakhadi 1,936 sq. yds. The learned Departmental Representative contended that in vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y at Bombay and the same reads as under: Asst. yr. 1978-79—Ground No. 2 "The learned AAC has further erred in law and on facts in reducing the value of let out portion of the Bombay property to Rs. 32,580 from Rs. 2,47,500." Asst. yr. 1979-80—Ground No. 3 "The learned AAC has further erred in law and on facts in directing the WTO to adopt the value of Bombay property as declared by the assessee as against the value of Rs. 5,50,000 adopted by the WTO." 5.1. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the dispute relates to the valuation of the let out portion of the Bombay property. He submitted that an agreement of sale was executed on 12th Feb., 1978 for a total consideration of Rs. 5,50,000 and an amount of Rs. 1,51,000 was received by the assessee as earned money. The WTO had valued the tenanted portion which was approximately 45 per cent of the entire property at Rs. 2,47,500 or the basis of aforesaid agreement of sale in asst. yr. 1978-79. The valued the tenanted portion which was approximately 45 per cent of the entire property at Rs. 2,47,500 on the basis of aforesaid agreement of sale in asst. yr. 1978-79. The value of this property in asst. yr. 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to asst. yr. 1979-80, 55 per cent of the property remained under self-occupation and 45 per cent portion remained let out to tenants, as in the earlier years. The learned counsel further submitted that the declared value of the tenanted portion is supported by report of the registered valuer who has determined the value of tenanted portion at Rs. 38,500. In view of aforesaid facts, the learned counsel contended that the AAC was fully justified in directing the WTO to accept the declared value of the aforesaid property in both the years under consideration. 5.3. We have considered the rival submissions made by the parties. There is no dispute that the portion which remained under self-occupation had to be valued in accordance with s. 7(4) of the WT Act. The only dispute relates to portion which has been rented out to the tenants. The reliance placed by the WTO and by the learned Departmental Representative on the agreement of sale is not correct, as the agreement of sale required that the premises will be not vacated from the tenants by the buyers. The land which was agreed to be sold came into saleable form, as agreed, only after the buyers got the property vacated from the t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee to raise additional ground in asst. yr. 1978-79. He invited our attention towards para 4 of the order passed by the AAC for asst. yr. 1978-79 in which it has been mentioned that the assessee raised an additional ground and wanted to correct the error of showing the value of property at Thane at Rs. 5,00,000. The assessee was not allowed to raise the said additional ground in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Addl. CIT vs. Gurjargravurers P. Ltd. (1978) CTR (SC) 1 : (1978) 111 ITR 1 (SC), as this point did not arise from the order of assessment passed by the WTO. He, therefore, contended that this fact should not stand in the way of the assessee's claim that the declared value was rightly accepted by the assessee. The learned counsel for the assessee thus supported the order passed by the AAC. 6.3. We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned representatives of both sides and have also gone through all the relevant orders and documents. In fact we have already taken a decision herein before with regard to Ground Nos. 2 and 3 of Revenue's appeal for asst. yrs. 1976-77 and 1977-78 in which we have sustained the finding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
