NCLAT: Can’t Dismiss Restoration App. if Filed in 30 Days from Date of Dismissal of Original App. || Delhi HC: Communication between Parties through Whatsapp Constitute Valid Agreement || Delhi HC Seeks Response from Govt. Over Penalties on Petrol Pumps Supplying Fuel to Old Vehicles || Centre Notifies "Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Rules, 2025" || Del. HC: Can’t Reject TM Owner’s Claim Merely because Defendant Could have Sought Removal of Mark || Bombay HC: Cannot Treat Sole Director of OPC, Parallelly with Separate Legal Entity || Delhi HC: Can Apply 'Family of Marks' Concept to Injunct Specific Marks || HP HC: Can’t Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Mere Irregularity || Cal. HC: Order by HC Bench Not Conferred With Determination by Roster is Void || Calcutta HC: Purchase Order Including Arbitration Agreement to Prevail Over Tax Invoice Lacking it

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 :