https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261234 The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision that the land was not a capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, as it was beyond 8 Kms from the municipal limits. The Assessing Officer's calculation of long term capital gain was revised after disallowing certain expenditures claimed by the assessee. The Revenue's challenge was dismissed based on evidence showing the land was 9 Kms from the municipal limits. The importance of factual evidence in determining asset classification for tax purposes was emphasized, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jul 2015 12:32:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261234 The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision that the land was not a capital asset under Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, as it was beyond 8 Kms from the municipal limits. The Assessing Officer's calculation of long term capital gain was revised after disallowing certain expenditures claimed by the assessee. The Revenue's challenge was dismissed based on evidence showing the land was 9 Kms from the municipal limits. The importance of factual evidence in determining asset classification for tax purposes was emphasized, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261234