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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 26

M.N.CHANDURKAR
S. Sarangapani Iyengar – Appellant
Versus
The Asst. Commr. Urban Land Tax – Respondent


ORDER

M.N. Chandurkar, C.J.

1. This revision is directed against the order of the Urban Land Tax Tribunal, Chingleput (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') holding that the agricultural lands in S. Nos. 27/2, 27/4A and 125/4 are liable to be assessed to Urban Land Tax.

2. The petitioner is the owner of the above mentioned lands in Sithalpakkam Village which have been assessed to Urban Land Tax under the Urban Land Tax Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act) by the Assistant Commissioner of Urban Land Tax. This assessment has been upheld by the Tribunal holding that the lands have been kept vacant during the fasli years 1381 to 1385 and the lands cannot, therefore, be held to be agricultural lands.

3. The contention which is raised in this revision petition on behalf of the petitioner is that being agricultural lands, they are not liable to assessment to Urban Land Tax. The learned Additional Government Pleader, however, contended that the only land which is exempted from being assessed is land which is registered as wet in the revenue accounts of the Government and used for the cultivation of wet crops as contemplated by the definition of 'Urban land' in Section 2(13). It





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