P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court || Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long || Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo || Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision || Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act || Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself || Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession || SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings || SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order || NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions

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 :