<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2011 (5) TMI 490 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209659</link>
    <description>Income from tissue culture and ornamental plant cultivation was examined under Section 2(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which requires derivation from land used for agricultural purposes. The text distinguishes agricultural operations carried out on land, such as sowing and cultivation, from tissue culture activities performed in laboratory conditions, which do not by themselves constitute agricultural operations. It also notes that the existing 70:30 or 90:10 apportionment lacked a reliable evidentiary basis. A field inspection was directed to verify the actual nature of the activities and to determine whether the income qualified for full agricultural exemption or required bifurcation between agricultural and non-agricultural components.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 15:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183104" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (5) TMI 490 - ITAT, Bangalore</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209659</link>
      <description>Income from tissue culture and ornamental plant cultivation was examined under Section 2(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which requires derivation from land used for agricultural purposes. The text distinguishes agricultural operations carried out on land, such as sowing and cultivation, from tissue culture activities performed in laboratory conditions, which do not by themselves constitute agricultural operations. It also notes that the existing 70:30 or 90:10 apportionment lacked a reliable evidentiary basis. A field inspection was directed to verify the actual nature of the activities and to determine whether the income qualified for full agricultural exemption or required bifurcation between agricultural and non-agricultural components.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209659</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>