<?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>2012 (9) TMI 577 - ITAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216769</link>
    <description>Income from basic seed and hybrid seed production was treated as agricultural income exempt under section 10(1) because the activity involved basic cultivation on owned land and supervised cultivation on leased land through farmers. The reimbursed cultivation costs and contract-farming arrangement did not change the agricultural character, as the operations remained intimately connected with cultivation on land. The seeds not being fit for human consumption also did not alter that character. The earlier year&#039;s decision in the assessee&#039;s own case was followed, and a contrary case was distinguished on the basis that there the assessee merely purchased produce meeting specifications rather than taking the produce from lands leased by it.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 17:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190148" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (9) TMI 577 - ITAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216769</link>
      <description>Income from basic seed and hybrid seed production was treated as agricultural income exempt under section 10(1) because the activity involved basic cultivation on owned land and supervised cultivation on leased land through farmers. The reimbursed cultivation costs and contract-farming arrangement did not change the agricultural character, as the operations remained intimately connected with cultivation on land. The seeds not being fit for human consumption also did not alter that character. The earlier year&#039;s decision in the assessee&#039;s own case was followed, and a contrary case was distinguished on the basis that there the assessee merely purchased produce meeting specifications rather than taking the produce from lands leased by it.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216769</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>