https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346227 The court reaffirmed the precedent that for an assessee to claim exemption under Section 54B of the Income Tax Act, the new agricultural land must be purchased in the name of the assessee. The appellant's argument that the land was bought in the name of the assessee's wife was rejected, citing the requirement for direct ownership by the assessee based on established legal principles and previous case law, including Jai Narayan's case. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision that exemption under Section 54B is not applicable when the new agricultural land is purchased in another individual's name. en-us Wed, 24 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346227 The court reaffirmed the precedent that for an assessee to claim exemption under Section 54B of the Income Tax Act, the new agricultural land must be purchased in the name of the assessee. The appellant's argument that the land was bought in the name of the assessee's wife was rejected, citing the requirement for direct ownership by the assessee based on established legal principles and previous case law, including Jai Narayan's case. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision that exemption under Section 54B is not applicable when the new agricultural land is purchased in another individual's name. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346227