SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(AP) 190

JAGMOHAN REDDY, PARTHASARATHI, RAMACHANDRA RAO
Officer in charge (Court of wards) Paigah – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Wealth-tax A. P. – Respondent


JAGANMOHAN REDDY, C. J.

( 1 ) AN important question as to what is the meaning of the words agricultual land for the purpose of wealth tax falls for determination in this referred case. A division Bench of the Madaras High Court in Sarojini Devi v. Sri krishna, A. I. R. 1944 Mad. 401 while interpreting the words agricultural lands occurring in Lists II and III of Schedule 7 to the Government of India Act, 1935, held that the expression must be taken to include lands which are used or are capable of being used for raising any valuable plains or trees or for any other purpose of husbandary the question there was whether a mango grove is an agricultural land in respect of which the Hindu Women s Rights to property Act, 1937 doe not operate to regulate succession. The words "agricultural lands" occur in Lists 1 and II of the Seventh schedule to the Constitution of India, i. e. in items 86, 87 and 88 of the Union list in the Constitution of India corresponding to Entries 55, 55 A and 56 of list I of the Government of India Act, 1935, and Itcmi 18, 47 and 48 of List ii of the Constitution of India corresponding to Entries 21, 43 and 43 A of the government of India Act, 1935. It is con
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top