2026 (3) TMI 1241

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent year 1993-94 to 1997-98, respectively. 2. At the time of admitting the appeals in T.C.A. Nos. 201 to 204 of 2011, this Court framed the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the agricultural lands measuring about 57.5 cents held by the appellant at Krishnarayapuram Village, Coimbatore should be classified as urban land under Section 2(ea)(v) of the Wealth-tax Act and subject to tax? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in not appreciating that the agricultural land on which no construction is permitted cannot be considered as urban land in view of explanation (b) to Sect....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he 1st day of April, 1993, or any subsequent assessment year, means_ ....... ....... ....... (v) Urban land." The relevant portion of the Act excludes land which, though falling within the general definition of "urban land" requires the permission of the authorities for any construction to be put on the said land. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the assessee had no intention of putting up any construction on the land, nor was any construction carried out on the land or seek any permission for putting up any construction. While the land all along been classified as agricultural land and was exempted from the urban land ceiling, the Assessing Authority as well as the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ther the land is situated within the prescribed municipal or corporation limits. 10. The pedantic reading of the Section 2(ea), without reference to analogous statutes governing agricultural land, resulted in an erroneous finding by the authorities. The revenue records and the exemption granted by the Urban Land Ceiling Authority, which were produced before the Assessing Authority, were ignored by both the Assessing Officer and the Appellate Authority without any justification. The mere fact that the land sold by the assessee was subsequently converted for non-agricultural purposes does not alter its character at the time of transfer. On the date of alienation, the property possessed all the trappings of agricultural land and was statuto....