https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341220 Land recorded in revenue records as agricultural, and supported by local land law and surrounding evidence of use, is not treated as a capital asset merely because cultivation is limited, non-commercial, or does not generate surplus income. The Bombay HC relied on ancestral ownership, agricultural entries, trees and horticultural use, personal consumption of produce, and the applicable definition under local land law to conclude that the Revenue had not displaced the assessees' case. It also rejected splitting the same land into agricultural and non-agricultural portions on the basis of an inspection report. The result was that the sale consideration was not chargeable to capital gains tax and the penalty could not stand. en-us Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Apr 2017 10:00:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341220 Land recorded in revenue records as agricultural, and supported by local land law and surrounding evidence of use, is not treated as a capital asset merely because cultivation is limited, non-commercial, or does not generate surplus income. The Bombay HC relied on ancestral ownership, agricultural entries, trees and horticultural use, personal consumption of produce, and the applicable definition under local land law to conclude that the Revenue had not displaced the assessees' case. It also rejected splitting the same land into agricultural and non-agricultural portions on the basis of an inspection report. The result was that the sale consideration was not chargeable to capital gains tax and the penalty could not stand. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341220