Land sale surplus as investment realisation, not business income, where Revenue failed to prove a trading venture.

Surplus from the sale of land was treated as a realisation of investment rather than business income, because the overall circumstances showed no repeated land dealings, no development activity, no trading organisation, and no commercial apparatus. In disputes over land transactions, the burden rests on the Revenue to prove that the venture was trading in character. On the facts found, that burden was not discharged, so the receipt was not assessable under the head of business.

---

---

Issues: Whether the surplus arising from the sale of the plot of land was assessable as business income from an adventure in the nature of trade, or represented realisation of investment.

Analysis: The decisive test was the totality of circumstances surrounding the purchase, holding, and sale of the land. The record showed no repeated dealings in land, no development activity, no trading organisation, and no commercial expertise or trading apparatus. In disputes relating to land, the burden lies on the Revenue to establish that the transaction had the character of a trading venture. On the facts found, the sale was treated as a realisation of investment rather than a commercial adventure.

Conclusion: The income from the land sale was held not chargeable under the head of business, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

---