Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2931 2004 SLD 2931 (2004) 270 ITR 408
Gujarat High Court
TAX APPEAL Nos. 118 TO 121 OF 2001 MAY 7, 2004
M.S. SHAH AND A.M. KAPADIA, 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

Dr. K.M. Shah

v.

Deputy Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Pagi room (watchman's room) admeasuring 19 square meters on a plot admeasuring 451 square meters cannot be described as a house exclusively used by assessee for residential purpose as contemplated by section 7(2) of Wealth-tax Act for purpose of valuation under Part 8 of Schedule III to Act Section 7, read with section 5(1)(iv) and (vi) (as it stood at relevant time), and section 2(ea) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Valuation of assets - Immovable property - Assessee purchased a land - Thereafter, he got prepared lay out plan of said land, which was approved by Municipal Corporation, and land was sub-plotted into four sub-plots - In 1968, assessee had gifted sub-plot No. 3 to his three daughters and a bungalow was constructed on sub-plot No. 1 - Sub-plot Nos. 2 and 4 did not have any construction except a small pagi room admeasuring 19 square meters on sub-plot No. 4 - Assessee, in his returns of wealth-tax, valued aforesaid property having four sub-plots and having a residential bungalow on sub-plot No. 1 under section 7(2), read with rules 3 to 6 in Schedule III and claimed exemption under section 5(1)(iv) - Whether pagi room (watchman's room) admeasuring 19 square meters on sub-plot No. 4 admeasuring 451 square meters could be described as a house exclusively used by assessee for residential purposes as contemplated by sub-section (2) of section 7 for purpose of valuation under Part 8 of Schedule III to Act - Held, no - Whether since assessee and his sons had, themselves, not only got land sub-plotted in year 1967, but had also gifted one of four plots to assessee's daughters and further, in appeal under Urban Land Ceiling Act, had claimed that said land had three residential units, sub-plot Nos. 2 and 4 could not be treated as land appurtenant to residential house of assessee - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, assessee was entitled to exemption under section 5(1)(iv) and/or under section 5(1)(vi) only in respect of bungalow constructed on sub-plot No. 1 and sub-plot Nos. 2 and 4 being 'urban land' within definition of section 2(ea) were liable to be included in assets for purpose of computation of net wealth - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, value of sub-plot…
🔒
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