IN THE ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH ‘B’
Sunil B. Handa
v/s.
Deputy Commissioner of Wealth-tax
WT APPEAL NOs. 15 TO 18 (AHD.) OF 2009
[ASSESSMENT YEARS 1999-2000 TO 2001-02 AND 2003-04]
JUNE 29, 2012
ORDER
Anil Chaturvedi, Accountant Member
These four appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of CWT(A)-VI, Ahmedabad all dated 23-2-2009 for the assessment years 1999-00, 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2003-04.
2. The assessee has raised following grounds in present appeals:
“2.1 The CWT(A)-VI has grievously erred in law and/or on facts in upholding that the residential bungalow on F.P. No.319 Paikee in TPS 1/B Bodakdev by consolidating sub-plot No.327 of survey No.251/1 was vacant urban land within the meaning of section 2(ea) of the W.T. Act.
2.2 That in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. CWT(A) ought not to have upheld that the said residential bungalow was urban land within the meaning of section 2(ea) of the W.T. Act and as such liable to Wealth tax.
2.3 The Ld. CWT(A) has grievously erred in law and/or in failing to consider that the residential bungalow was exempt u/s. 5(vi) of the Act.”
2.1 Since the facts and issues involved are identical for all the 4 assessment years and the appeals have been heard together, these are being disposed off by a single consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
3. The appellant is an Individual and assessed to tax regularly in respect of salary income and income from other source. In this case, on verification of income tax records, it was noticed by the Wealth tax Officer (WTO) that the assessee had urban land. In the statement of Long term capital gain in the Income tax return, the assessee had shown land and incomplete construction thereon at Bodakdev, Ahmedabad as per the details given below:-
