https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27553 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, rejecting the Revenue's claims that the land purchase and subsequent sale constituted an adventure in the nature of trade. The Court emphasized the importance of distinguishing between questions of fact and law, affirming the Tribunal's findings that the land was initially intended for agricultural purposes based on evidence such as the installation of a tubewell. The Court held that once the assessee's intent at the time of purchase was established, conflicting intentions could not coexist, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's arguments. en-us Tue, 10 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:32:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27553 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, rejecting the Revenue's claims that the land purchase and subsequent sale constituted an adventure in the nature of trade. The Court emphasized the importance of distinguishing between questions of fact and law, affirming the Tribunal's findings that the land was initially intended for agricultural purposes based on evidence such as the installation of a tubewell. The Court held that once the assessee's intent at the time of purchase was established, conflicting intentions could not coexist, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's arguments. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Jul 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27553