https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18015 The court held that the land did not qualify for exemption under section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act as the assessee failed to provide substantial evidence of agricultural use besides the existence of mango trees. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue based on the lack of proof of agricultural activities on the land, despite the presence of trees. The judgment emphasizes the importance of demonstrating active agricultural practices to claim exemption under the Wealth-tax Act. en-us Thu, 16 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:18:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18015 The court held that the land did not qualify for exemption under section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth-tax Act as the assessee failed to provide substantial evidence of agricultural use besides the existence of mango trees. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue based on the lack of proof of agricultural activities on the land, despite the presence of trees. The judgment emphasizes the importance of demonstrating active agricultural practices to claim exemption under the Wealth-tax Act. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Thu, 16 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18015