GIRIDHAR G. YADALAM versus COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX &ANR.

Citation: [2015] 15 S.C.R. 543 · Decided: 24-07-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Disposed off

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 15 S.C.R. 543 
GIRIDHAR G. YADALAM 
v. 
COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX &ANR. 
(Civil Appeal No. 728 of 2011) 
JULY24, 2015 
[A. K. SIKRI AND R. F. NARIMAN, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Wealth Tax Act, 1957: s.2(ea)(v), Explanation 1 (b) -
Urban land - Exemption to wealth tax - Held: Benefit of 
exemption in respect of urban land is available only when C 
the building is fully constructed and not when the 
construction activity has merely started - In the instant 
case, asses see is not entitled to benefit of exemption under 
the clause as the building was still under construction during 
the assessment year. 
D 
Interpretation of Statutes: Taxing statute - Held: In 
taxing statute, it is the plain language of the provision that 
has to be preferred where language is plain and is capable 
of one definite meaning. 
Disposing of the matters, the Court 
E 
HELD: 1. The plain language of the prov1s1on in 
question conveys that the benefit of the said clause 
would be applicable only in respect of the building 
'which has been constructed'. The expression 'has been F 
constructed' obviously cannot include within its sweep 
a building which is not fully constructed or in the 
process of construction. The opening words of clause 
(ii) also become important in this behalf, where it is stated 
that 'the land occupied by any building'. The land G 
cannot be treated to be occupied by a building where it 
is still under construction. In taxing statute, it is the plain 
language of the provision that has to be preferred where 
language is plain and is capable of one definite meaning. 
543 
H 
544 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015) 15 S.C.R. 
A Strict interpretation to the exemption provision is to 
be accorded, which is the case at hand. The purposive 
interpretation can be given only when there is some 
ambiguity in the language of the statutory provision or it 
leads to absurd results. There is no ambiguity as such 
B in the present case. [Para 16] [551-G-H; 552-A-B, E-G] 
c 
M. Nizamuden v. Chemplast Sanmar Limited and 
Ors. (2010) 4 sec 240 : 2010 (3) SCR 315 -
referred to. 
Case Law Reference 
2010· (3) SCR 315 
referred to. 
Para 11 
CIVILAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 728 
of 2011. 
o 
From the Judgment and Order dated 21.03.2007 of the 
High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in WTA No. 25 of 2006. 
WITH 
C.A.Nos. 729,730,731,732,733,734,735, 736, 737, 
E 
738, 739, 741, 742, 743, 744, 745, 746, 747, 748, 749, 750, 
751, 752, 753, 754, 755, 756, 757, 758, 759, 760, 761, 762, 
763, 764, 765, 766, 767, 768, 769, 770, 771, 772, 773, 774, 
775, 776, 777, 778, 779, 780 OF 2011 
. F 
SLP(C) Nos. 19011 and 19012 of 2012 . 
Gopal Jain, Sr. Adv., Ms. Chinmayee Chandra, Ms. 
Khushboo Bari, Mrs. Nandini Gore, Kartik Bhatnagar, Ms. 
Trishula Kulkarni, Mis. Karanjawala & Co., Advs. for the 
Appellant. 
G 
Rupesh Kumar, S. A. Haseeb, Mrs. Anil Katiyar, Ms. 
Sadhna Sandhu, Vikash Malhotra, Ms. Swarupama 
Chaturvedi, B. V. Balaram Das, Abhijat P. Medh, Advs., for the 
Respondents. 
H 
GIRIDHAR G. YADALAM v. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH 
545 
TAX&ANR. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
A 
. 
A. K. SIKRI, J. 1. In these cases, we are concerned with 
the interpretation that is to be accorded to the provisions of 
Explanation 1 (b) to Section 2( ea)(v) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). This Explanation defines 
'Urban Land'. Urban land is exigible to wealth tax under the 
B 
aforesaid Act. However; the definition of 'urban land' in 
explanation 1 (b) excludes certain category of lands. As per 
Explanation 1 (b) to Section 2(ea)(v), 'urban land' to mean land 
situate - but does not includes:-
(i) land classified as 'agricultural land' in the records of 
the Government and used for agricultural purposes or land on 
which construction of a building is not permissible under any 
law for the time being in force in the area in which such land is 
situated; or 
· 
(ii) the land occupied by any building which has been 
constructed with the approval of the appropriate authority; or 
c 
D 
(iii) any unused land held by the assessee for industrial 
purposes for a period of two years from the date of its 
acquisition by him; or 
E 
(iv) any land held by the assessee as 'stock-in-trade' for 
a period of ten years from the date of its acquisition. 
2. To put it pithily, what calls for interpretation is clause 
(ii) above, namely, what is the meaning that is to be attributed 
F 
to the expression "the land occupied by any buildin

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.