Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Exemption under section 54B requires proof of actual agricultural use of the land during the prescribed period; mere classification in revenue records is insufficient. The Tribunal found that revised 7/12 extracts could only raise a presumption and were not conclusive without corroborative evidence such as produce sale bills, seed or fertiliser purchase records, labour records, or other material showing active cultivation. As no such evidence was produced, the essential statutory condition remained unproved and the denial of exemption was upheld, with the addition sustained. The Tribunal also distinguished the cited contrary precedent on facts and relied on authority holding that revenue entries alone do not establish agricultural use.
Exemption under section 54B requires proof of actual agricultural use of the land during the prescribed period; mere classification in revenue records is insufficient. The Tribunal found that revised 7/12 extracts could only raise a presumption and were not conclusive without corroborative evidence such as produce sale bills, seed or fertiliser purchase records, labour records, or other material showing active cultivation. As no such evidence was produced, the essential statutory condition remained unproved and the denial of exemption was upheld, with the addition sustained. The Tribunal also distinguished the cited contrary precedent on facts and relied on authority holding that revenue entries alone do not establish agricultural use.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
