https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395619 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment and the validity of the sanction granted under Section 151. However, it found that the agricultural land sold was not a capital asset, thus directing the AO to delete the addition. The appeals were partly allowed, with the primary issue of the land's status as a capital asset being decisive. The Tribunal did not address the taxability in the hands of the individual versus the HUF or the eligibility for exemption under Section 54B, as these issues became irrelevant. en-us Tue, 26 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 May 2020 14:17:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395619 The Tribunal upheld the reopening of the assessment and the validity of the sanction granted under Section 151. However, it found that the agricultural land sold was not a capital asset, thus directing the AO to delete the addition. The appeals were partly allowed, with the primary issue of the land's status as a capital asset being decisive. The Tribunal did not address the taxability in the hands of the individual versus the HUF or the eligibility for exemption under Section 54B, as these issues became irrelevant. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395619