https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57073 The Tribunal held that it could not examine the constitutional validity of the levy and was confined to applying the Wealth-tax Act as enacted. Agricultural land within the notified municipal belt satisfied the restrictive definition of "urban land" under section 2(ea), and its agricultural description in revenue records did not override that statutory classification. The business-house exemption did not apply because open agricultural land is not a house occupied for business or profession, and a small shed did not change that character. The exclusion for land on which construction is not permissible also failed, as mere regulatory permission requirements are not an absolute legal prohibition. The land was therefore treated as taxable urban land. en-us Thu, 21 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 06 Feb 2011 06:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57073 The Tribunal held that it could not examine the constitutional validity of the levy and was confined to applying the Wealth-tax Act as enacted. Agricultural land within the notified municipal belt satisfied the restrictive definition of "urban land" under section 2(ea), and its agricultural description in revenue records did not override that statutory classification. The business-house exemption did not apply because open agricultural land is not a house occupied for business or profession, and a small shed did not change that character. The exclusion for land on which construction is not permissible also failed, as mere regulatory permission requirements are not an absolute legal prohibition. The land was therefore treated as taxable urban land. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Thu, 21 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=57073