V.K Singhal, J.—The validity of Sections 2(ea)(i) and 2(ea)(ii) and 2(m) of the Wealth tax Act as inserted by the Finance Act, 1992, with effect from April 1, 1993, has been assailed in this petition. It is stated that prior to its amendment Section 2(m) which defined "net wealth" included all the assets belonging to the assessee on such valuation date, minus debts owed by him. Now by an amendment it is only debts in respect of that assets which could be reduced and therefore it has gone beyond the scheme of the Act.

2. It is submitted that the levy of tax on land and building which is exclusively within the legislative competence of the State Legislature under entry 49, List II, Schedule VII, of the Constitution of India cannot be made liable to tax under the Wealth-tax Act. Reliance is placed on the judgment given by the apex court in the case of SUDHIR CHANDRA NAWN Vs. WEALTH-TAX OFFICER, CALCUTTA, AND OTHERS. INTERVENERS : (1) STATE OF ASSAM; (2) STATE OF KERALA; AND (3) STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH., (1968) 69 ITR 897 SC, where it was observed that the tax which is imposed by entry 86, List, I, of the Seventh Schedule is not directly a tax on lands and buildings. It is a tax