https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348346 Compulsory acquisition compensation for agricultural land within municipal limits was treated as capital gains arising from transfer of a capital asset, but the exemption under section 10(37) applied on the stated facts because the land remained agricultural in character. The commentary also states that rectification under section 154 was available to exclude the interest component in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Ghanshyam (HUF), since applying a binding declaration of law under Article 141 did not require adjudication of disputed facts. A revised return was not necessary for that correction. en-us Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Sep 2017 07:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348346 Compulsory acquisition compensation for agricultural land within municipal limits was treated as capital gains arising from transfer of a capital asset, but the exemption under section 10(37) applied on the stated facts because the land remained agricultural in character. The commentary also states that rectification under section 154 was available to exclude the interest component in light of the Supreme Court ruling in Ghanshyam (HUF), since applying a binding declaration of law under Article 141 did not require adjudication of disputed facts. A revised return was not necessary for that correction. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 11 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348346