<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Land Sale Gain Ruled as Capital Gain, Not Business Income; Long-Term Agricultural Use Cited in Decision.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64841</link>
    <description>Gain on sale of land - capital gain or business income - The statement read as a whole does not indicate that the assessee has admitted as observed by A.O. in assessment order i.e. he is engaged in the activity of business in property. The adverse inference drawn by A.O. in assessment proceedings is unjustified. It is noted that one of the property sold was owned and held for around 9 1/2 years and another property sold was owned and held for 6 years. Property owned and held was enjoyed for deriving agricultural income which is accepted in the case of assessee. Both the properties are held as co-owner. On above factual position it cannot be concluded that surplus arising is business income as held by A.O. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 13:11:08 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 13:11:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=686381" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Land Sale Gain Ruled as Capital Gain, Not Business Income; Long-Term Agricultural Use Cited in Decision.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64841</link>
      <description>Gain on sale of land - capital gain or business income - The statement read as a whole does not indicate that the assessee has admitted as observed by A.O. in assessment order i.e. he is engaged in the activity of business in property. The adverse inference drawn by A.O. in assessment proceedings is unjustified. It is noted that one of the property sold was owned and held for around 9 1/2 years and another property sold was owned and held for 6 years. Property owned and held was enjoyed for deriving agricultural income which is accepted in the case of assessee. Both the properties are held as co-owner. On above factual position it cannot be concluded that surplus arising is business income as held by A.O. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2022 13:11:08 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64841</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>