P C OSWAL Vs. S P MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE common question of law arising for our determination in this group of writ petitions is :

(2.) THE ground of challenge urged in the petition is that Parliament has no legislative competence to enact the said Act in relation to our State. Section 3 of the Act declares that there shall be charged for every assessment year a tax in respect of the net wealth, on the corresponding valuation date, of every individual, HUF and company at the rate or rates specified in the Schedule. The expression 'net wealth' is defined in Section 2(m) as meaning 'the amount by which the aggregate value computed in accordance with the provisions of this Act of all the assets, wherever located, belonging to the assessee on the valuation date, including assets required to be included in his net wealth as on that date under this Act, is in excess of the aggregate value of all the debts owed by the assessee on the valuation date other than...' The expression 'assets' is defined in Section 2(e) as inclusive of property of every description, movable or immovable, but does not include agricultural land and growing crops, grass or standing trees on such land or any building owned or occupied by a cultivator of, or receiver of rent or revenue out of agricultural land. The definition of the expression 'assets' has been so circumscribed in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir but in respect of other States the definition is of wider amplitude and includes agricultural land, growing crops, grass or standing trees on such land and any building owned or occupied by a cultivator of, or receiver of rent or revenue out of agricultural land. The constitutional provisions having bearing on the determination of the question before us may now be set out.

(3.) IN its application to the State, for article 248, the following Article has been substituted, namely : - -