Karnataka HC: A Neighbour Cannot be Charged With Matrimonial Cruelty under Section 498A IPC || Revisional Power U/S 25B(8) of Delhi Rent Control Act is Supervisory; HC Cannot Revisit Facts || Poverty Cannot Bar Parole; Rajasthan HC Waives Surety For Indigent Life Convict, Sets Guidelines || Delhi High Court: Late Payment of TDS Does Not Absolve Criminal Liability under the Income Tax Act || NCLT Kochi: Avoidance Provisions under Insolvency Code Aim to Restore, Not Punish, Parties || Bombay High Court: In IBC Cases, High Courts Lack Parallel Contempt Jurisdiction over the NCLT || Supreme Court: Concluded Auction Cannot Be Cancelled Merely To Invite Higher Bids at a Later Stage || SC: In Customs Classification, Statutory Tariff Headings and HSN Notes Prevail over Common Parlance || SC: Under the Urban Land Ceiling Act, Notice U/S 10(5) Must be Served on the Person in Possession || Supreme Court: Only Courts May Condone Delay; Tribunals Lack Power Unless Statute Allows

S.N. Wadiyar v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Karnataka - (Supreme Court) (21 Sep 2015)

Supreme Court values excess land owned by Wadiyar royalty

MANU/SC/1044/2015

Direct Taxation

In a question on valuation of property for the purposes of wealth tax, the Supreme Court held that property, the overall area of which exceeded that allowed by the Ceiling Act, 1962, would not be valued at open market price. Vacant land that fell within the ambit of the Ceiling Act would be valued at Rs. 2 lakhs, the maximum allowable under the Act, while the remaining area would be valued at the open market price.

Relevant : Section 11 Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 Act Ahmed G.H. Ariff v. Commissioner of Wealth Tax MANU/SC/0167/1969

Tags : CEILING VALUATION LAND WEALTH TAX

Share :