<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1979 (4) TMI 62 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67313</link>
    <description>Agricultural land remained includible in net wealth where, on the relevant valuation dates, proceedings under the M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act had not culminated in a final order declaring the land surplus or vesting it in the State, and the assessee continued as owner in exclusive possession. The restrictions on transfer under the Ceiling Act did not amount to a total prohibition on sale, and any limitation on marketability did not remove the asset from charge under the Wealth-tax Act. Section 7 was relevant only to valuation on a hypothetical open-market basis, not to exclusion of the land from the taxable asset base. The land was therefore chargeable to wealth-tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:25:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=105748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (4) TMI 62 - ITAT JABALPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67313</link>
      <description>Agricultural land remained includible in net wealth where, on the relevant valuation dates, proceedings under the M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act had not culminated in a final order declaring the land surplus or vesting it in the State, and the assessee continued as owner in exclusive possession. The restrictions on transfer under the Ceiling Act did not amount to a total prohibition on sale, and any limitation on marketability did not remove the asset from charge under the Wealth-tax Act. Section 7 was relevant only to valuation on a hypothetical open-market basis, not to exclusion of the land from the taxable asset base. The land was therefore chargeable to wealth-tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Wealth-tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=67313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>