https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262130 Urban land under ceiling proceedings and legal restrictions on construction and alienation must be valued for wealth-tax purposes with those constraints in mind; it cannot be treated as unrestricted marketable property. Where the assessee's rights are uncertain because of pending identification, demarcation, acquisition, or statutory prohibition, the valuation must reflect the depressed value created by the ceiling law rather than the Sub-Registrar rate. The commentary also notes that a penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act cannot stand once the underlying wealth addition is deleted on merits, because the penalty foundation disappears with the substantive assessment. en-us Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Aug 2015 12:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262130 Urban land under ceiling proceedings and legal restrictions on construction and alienation must be valued for wealth-tax purposes with those constraints in mind; it cannot be treated as unrestricted marketable property. Where the assessee's rights are uncertain because of pending identification, demarcation, acquisition, or statutory prohibition, the valuation must reflect the depressed value created by the ceiling law rather than the Sub-Registrar rate. The commentary also notes that a penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act cannot stand once the underlying wealth addition is deleted on merits, because the penalty foundation disappears with the substantive assessment. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Wed, 29 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262130