https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289490 The ITAT Pune allowed the appeal, ruling that the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) were not applicable to the agricultural land purchased by the assessee. The ITAT Pune emphasized that agricultural land is excluded from the definition of a capital asset under section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, and as the land was held as stock in trade, no addition to income was warranted. The decision rejected the reliance on a previous tribunal ruling and favored the assessee, ultimately allowing the appeal. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Mar 2026 11:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289490 The ITAT Pune allowed the appeal, ruling that the provisions of section 56(2)(vii)(b) were not applicable to the agricultural land purchased by the assessee. The ITAT Pune emphasized that agricultural land is excluded from the definition of a capital asset under section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, and as the land was held as stock in trade, no addition to income was warranted. The decision rejected the reliance on a previous tribunal ruling and favored the assessee, ultimately allowing the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289490