Case Details

Citation(s)
1998 SLG 1071 1998 SLD 1071 1998 PTD 1442 (1998) 224 ITR 175
Patna High Court
Tax Cases Nos. 135 to 141 of 1984, decision dated: 16-05-1996
SACHCHIDANAND, JHA AND M. Y. EQBAL, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

VS

NATHMAL JALAN

Law: Wealth Tax Act, 1957

Section: 5(1)(iva),3,2(1)(a)

Wealth tax--- ---- Exemption---Burden of proof--Agricultural land---Burden on assessee to prove that he was entitled to exemption---No evidence to prove that land was agricultural ---Assessee not entitled to exemption in respect of such land---Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957, S.5(1)(iv-a). The onus to prove that a particular asset qualifies for exemption is on the person who claims it, that is, the assessee. Although it may always be difficult to draw a line of demarcation between agricultural and non-agricultural land, yet unless there is some measure of cultivation on the land, some expenditure of skill and labour upon it, it cannot be said to be used for agricultural purposes: Held, that from the report of the Income-tax Inspector it appeared that the land in question as not only situated by the side of an industrial estate but it was also enclosed by a boundary wall. Certain mango trees stood on the land but trees were standing from before. In other words, the trees were not planted by the assessee. There was no evidence to suggest that the assessee was carrying on any kind of activity connected with rearing of trees like ploughing, manuring, watering and so on. The only evidence produced by the assessee was two land revenue receipts, which he had obviously obtained during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal. The receipts did not show the nature of the land. The exemption under section 5(1)(iva) of the Indian Wealth Tax Act, 1957, was not allowable in respect of the land. CIT v. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy (1957) 32 ITR 466 (SC); Raja Mustafa Ali Khan v. CIT (1948) 16 ITR 330 (PC) and Syed Rafiqur Rahman v. CWT (1970) 75 ITR 318 (Pat.) ref. JUDGMENT The assessee purchased 0.19 acre land corresponding to 6 Kathas according to local measurement units some time in 1970. The land contained 12 mango trees. He included the value of the said land in the returns of net wealth filed for the assessment years 1970-71 to 1976-77. As, however, the land contained mango trees, he claimed exemption from assessment in terms of section 5(1)(iva) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, on the ground that it was,, agricultural land. The Wealth Tax Officer got enquiry made by the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492