AMIN CHAND MEHTA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is instituted by the appellant -assessee against the order rendered by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in WTA Nos. 49 to 54/Chd/2008 dated 30.1.2009.

(2.) THE appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:

(3.) MR . Vishal Mohan, Advocate, for the appellant has vehemently argued that the impugned land is agriculture land and does not fall within the definition of "urban land". In other words, his submission is that it was beyond the purview of Wealth Tax. He also argued that the trees are standing on the land, thus the construction was not possible without seeking permission from the statutory authorities. He has also relied upon the demarcation report carried out by the Assistant Collector, Shimla (Urban) on 14.3.2008, whereby the land was found to be covered by trees. He lastly contended that the land on which the trees are standing cannot be used for construction purpose without seeking permission of the competent authority. On the other hand, learned counsel for the department has supported the orders passed by the learned authorities below.