TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 100
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras 'A' Bench for the assessment year 2008-09. 2.The following substantial questions of law have been raised for consideration: "1.Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the AO's estimation on the basis of guideline value is not justified in view of the proposed road through the subject land and pending finalisation and demarcation of exact location, the authorities concerned may not permit any construction over the land? 2.Whether the Tribunal is correct in holding that once the construction is not permissible the land in question cannot fall within the definition of "Urban Land" u/s. 2(ea) of the Wealth Tax Act when the assessee himself classified this proper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ft road has been proposed to be formed in those lands and other adjacent lands. Therefore, it was argued that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is erroneous. The CWT(A) did not specifically deal with the said issue to reject the case of the assessee by stating that the letter of the Member Secretary, CMDA dated 17.04.2012 is not addressed to the assessee and accordingly, confirmed the wealth tax assessment. The assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal which in our considered view rightly took note of Section 2(ea) of the Act and more particularly, Proviso to Explanation 1(b) which defines Urban Land. After noting that there was proposal to form a 100 ft road and that no construction can be put up on the land and that apart, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for consideration before this Court in the case of The Principal Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Central-2, Chennai vs. Mrs.Sushila Devi Kejriwal in T.C.A.Nos.683 to 686 of 2019, wherein the said property fell within the Coastal Region Zone-III and identical submissions were made by the revenue to sustain the revenue to sustain the wealth tax assessment. The appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed by judgment dated 01.10.2020, in which, we had followed the decision in T.C.A.Nos.622 to 624 of 2018 dated 30.09.2020. The operative portion of the judgment reads as follows: "5.In the assessee's own case for the assessment years from 2005-2006 to 2007-2008 the Tribunal rejected the Department's appeals on the ground of low tax effect. The ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment, it has been decided by the Board that monetary limits for filing of appeals in Income tax case as prescribed in Para 3 of the Circular shall also apply to Wealth Tax appeals through extension of the Circular to Wealth tax matters in a mutatis mutandis manner and with modifications as prescribed hereunder: 3.For the purpose of Wealth Tax appeals: A. Para 4 of the Circular shall be read as follows: "For this purpose, 'tax effect' means the difference between the tax on Net Wealth assessed and the tax that would have been chargeable had such Net Wealth been reduced by the amount of wealth in respect of the issues against which appeals is intended to be filed. However, the tax will not include any intere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... counsel for the parties on the merits of the matter. The issue pertains to valuation of a property in Neelankarai village. The assessee contended that the property falls within the high tide zone and in the terms of the coastal zone regulations, the property cannot be put to use for the purpose of constructing any building there on and even if an application is made to the local planning authority / local body, the same will be rejected, as the planning authorities have no jurisdiction to deal with any application for grant of planning permission on a land, which falls within CRZ limits. 8.The assessing officer did not agree with the same, however, the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] - 15 Chennai, [for brevity, 'CITA'....