https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326782 The tribunal invalidated the reassessments due to lack of proper service of notice under section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act. However, it upheld the classification of urban land as a capital asset for wealth tax purposes, ruling against treating it as stock-in-trade. The tribunal also affirmed that the Joint Development Agreement did not transfer ownership, keeping the land taxable in the assessee's wealth. Additionally, the tribunal rejected the deduction of refundable deposits from the Fair Market Value, supporting the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) decision. en-us Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Apr 2016 11:16:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326782 The tribunal invalidated the reassessments due to lack of proper service of notice under section 17 of the Wealth Tax Act. However, it upheld the classification of urban land as a capital asset for wealth tax purposes, ruling against treating it as stock-in-trade. The tribunal also affirmed that the Joint Development Agreement did not transfer ownership, keeping the land taxable in the assessee's wealth. Additionally, the tribunal rejected the deduction of refundable deposits from the Fair Market Value, supporting the Commissioner of Wealth Tax (Appeals) decision. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Fri, 12 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326782