https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3759 HC upheld ITAT's factual finding and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding no substantial question of law arose. The assessee sold agricultural land and reinvested the proceeds in another agricultural parcel recorded in the assessee's and his dependent son's names; the land is used by the assessee for agricultural purposes. Because the purchase was for agricultural use and not exclusively for the son, the HC found the ITAT rightly allowed deduction under s.54B and refused interference with that factual conclusion. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jul 2026 14:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3759 HC upheld ITAT's factual finding and dismissed the revenue's appeal, holding no substantial question of law arose. The assessee sold agricultural land and reinvested the proceeds in another agricultural parcel recorded in the assessee's and his dependent son's names; the land is used by the assessee for agricultural purposes. Because the purchase was for agricultural use and not exclusively for the son, the HC found the ITAT rightly allowed deduction under s.54B and refused interference with that factual conclusion. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3759