TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Counsel and Ld. D.Rs in detail. After hearing was concluded on 11.08.2016, it has come to the knowledge of the Bench that the notification relied on by Assessing Officer was set aside and a fresh notification was issued subsequently. Hence, the case was re-fixed on 19.08.2016 and heard in detail again. 3. For the sake of clarity, the Appeal in WTA.No.27/H/2016 is discussed herein. The assessee herein M/s. Siseri Agro Farms P. Ltd., is assessed to tax in the jurisdiction of Assistant Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad. Assessee-company owns certain assets, mainly agricultural lands. It has not filed any wealth tax return for the impugned assessment year as it considered that there is no taxable wealth. On the valua....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment prevails over the GHMC notification issued by State Government. It further relied on the amendment brought to Section 2(ea) by the Finance Act, 2013 to exclude land classified as agricultural land in the records of Government and used for agricultural operations from the scope of 'Urban Land'. It was contended that the lands are agricultural lands in the records of Government and are used for agricultural purposes. 3.1. Assessing Officer however did not agree. His reasoning for rejecting the assessee contentions are as under : "Regarding assessee's claim that the company's lands are situated beyond the limits of 8 KM of notified municipal limits of Hyderabad, the assessee's claim is not acceptable for the follow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r (M), are situated well within the stipulated 8 km. distance with regard to the said notified Corporation w.e.f. 16-04-2007 onwards. Whereas, in the instant case the assessee was in possession of 5.00 Acres. Land situated in 5y.No. 206/P of Bachupally (V) valued at Rs. 3,75,00,000 (guide line value Rs. 75,00,000 per acre) needs to be classified as urban land instead of Agl. Lands for the purpose of Wealth tax. In view of the above the assessee's claim is not acceptable hence rejected." 3.2. Accordingly, the wealth was determined at Rs. 3.75 crores and after giving deduction of debts in relation to the above assets, the taxable wealth was determined at Rs. 53,91,852. 4. Even though similar objections were raised before Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion in the name of GHMC. * (The State Government acting within its powers renotified the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad and gave it a different name. The Assessing Officer merely applied to Wealth Tax Act to the notified and existing Municipality with reference to the limits as they stood on the valuation date. Therefore, this land became taxable on 31.3.2008 for the same reason that it could not have been brought to tax on 31.3.2007. * Reliance was also placed on two decisions of the Visakhapatnam Bench of the ITAT in the case of Smt. C. Girija (ITA.No.424/Vizag/2009 dated 27.9.2010) and Sri Krishna Murthy Vallu (ITA.No.530/Vizag/2010 dated 8.8.2011) rendered on comparable facts, for the propositio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cipalities i.e., 1. L.B. Nagar, 2. Gaddiannaram, 3. Uppal Kalan 4. Malkajgiri, 5. Kapra, 6. Alwal, 7. Quthbullapur, 8. Kukatpually. 9. Serilingampalli. 10. Rajendranagar, 11. Ramachandrapuram and 12. Patancheru and 08 Gram Panchayats ie.1. Shamshabad 2. Satmadi 3. Jalapalli 4.Mandipalli 5. Mankhal 6. Almasguda 7. Sardar Nagar 8. Ravarala around Hyderabad does not include Qutubullapur Mandal. (d) Notification dated 31.08.2013 and 05.09.2013 more particularly G.O.Ms.No.416 dated 05.09.2013, for the first time included Gram Panchayat 'Bachupally' under Qutubullapur Mandal for inclusion in GHMC and so the village Bachupalli was not yet covered in the notification dated 16.04.2007 considered by the Assessing Officer. (e) Even t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid village is still outside GHMC limits. So the Assessing Officer is directed to examine all aspects afresh, after giving due opportunity to the assessee. He should also consider the judicial principles on the subject, more so the reliance placed on the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court by Learned Counsel for the assessee in the course of arguments or any other case by the time assessment is completed. In case the lands in question are not 'Urban Lands' for the purpose of Wealth Tax, Assessing Officer is free to drop the proceedings by passing a well reasoned order. With these observations/directions, the orders of Assessing Officer and CIT(A) are set aside and the assessment of wealth is restored to Assessing Officer for fresh cons....