SC: ‘Abandonment of Service is Not Voluntary Retirement’, Denying SBI Clerk Pension Benefits || Supreme Court: Stranger Affected by an Interim Order is Entitled to be Impleaded in Writ Proceedings || Supreme Court: Courts Cannot Replace an Authority’s Discretion, and Sets Aside Direction to Governor || SC: Title Suit Hit by Constructive Res Judicata if Omitted in Prior Injunction Suit Disputing Title || SC Clarifies Whether a Co-Operative Society Can Act as a Resolution Applicant under the IBC || Chhattisgarh High Court: Innocent Litigants Should Not be Penalized For Lapses by Their Lawyers || Delhi High Court: Marriage With the Victim Cannot Absolve an Accused of Rape under POCSO || J&K&L HC: Acquisition Lapses if 80% Compensation is Unpaid Before Possession under Section 17A || Delhi HC: Policy Number is Not Mandatory For LIC Details under RTI, But Basic Details are Required || SC: Courts Must Curb Unlicensed Money Lenders; Probes Need Not Wait For New Law

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 :