Wta/1/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Limited, Kukatpally
High Court
26 Nov 2014 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Wta/1/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Limited, Kukatpally
Date of order
26 Nov 2014
Assessment year(s)
2003-2004
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wta/1/2014 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii v. M/S Gulf Oil Corporation Limited, Kukatpally, the High Court (2014) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRAPRADESH
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.1 OF 2014
DATED:26.11.2014
Between:
Commissioner of Income Tax – III.T. Towers, A.C. GuardsHyderabad … Appellant
And
M/s. Gulf Oil Corporation LimitedKukatpally, Post Box No.1SanathnagarHyderabad … Respondent
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA ANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
WEALTH TAX APPEAL NO.1 OF 2014
JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta)
The judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dt.13.11.2013 inrelation to assessment year 2003-2004 is sought to be impugned by theRevenue on the following suggested questions of law.
i.“In the facts and circumstances of the case, whetherthe Hon’ble Tribunal (ITAT) is correct in law in holdingthat the flats which are not let out for the residentialpurpose and also which are not qualified as commercialestablishment or complex are exempt from Wealth Tax?
ii.In the facts and circumstances of the case, whetherthe Hon’ble Tribunal (ITAT) is correct in law in holdingthat merely because income has shown under the headof ‘house property’ a property let out for businesspurpose is exempt from Wealth Tax?”
We have heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned counsel for theappellant, and examined the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. Itappears that the learned Tribunal on fact found that there has not beentotal change in the nature of the property and only development agreementwas entered into before conversion of the land and it cannot be assessedas acquisition of wealth as the value thereof remains within the exemptedlimit. In view of the appreciation of fact, we do not find any element of lawto decide in this appeal.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as tocosts.
________________________
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ
_______________________
SANJAY KUMAR,
J 26.11.2014bnr
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.