https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197976 Where land dealings showed organised steps for conversion into non-agricultural use, development for residential units, and repeated sale activity, the profit was treated as business income rather than long-term capital gain. The absence of convincing evidence of investment character or genuine agricultural use supported a commercial adventure finding, and the assessee's challenge on quantum failed. For penalty, however, disclosure of the primary facts and the debatable nature of the income classification meant that concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars was not established, so section 271(1)(c) penalty was not sustainable. en-us Thu, 22 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jan 2018 14:15:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197976 Where land dealings showed organised steps for conversion into non-agricultural use, development for residential units, and repeated sale activity, the profit was treated as business income rather than long-term capital gain. The absence of convincing evidence of investment character or genuine agricultural use supported a commercial adventure finding, and the assessee's challenge on quantum failed. For penalty, however, disclosure of the primary facts and the debatable nature of the income classification meant that concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars was not established, so section 271(1)(c) penalty was not sustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 22 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197976