https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36292 The court held that capital gains arising from the transfer of agricultural land used for agricultural purposes constitute "agricultural income" and fall within the State's legislative field. The impugned sub-clause defining "capital asset" was read down to exclude such agricultural land, preserving the State's power to tax agricultural income. The court found the classification between urban and rural areas to be rational, rejecting claims of arbitrariness. Delegation of power to the executive was deemed permissible. Capital gains tax was clarified as a tax on income, not on land. The court quashed assessment orders and directed fresh assessments excluding profits from agricultural land sales. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Mar 2010 14:18:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36292 The court held that capital gains arising from the transfer of agricultural land used for agricultural purposes constitute "agricultural income" and fall within the State's legislative field. The impugned sub-clause defining "capital asset" was read down to exclude such agricultural land, preserving the State's power to tax agricultural income. The court found the classification between urban and rural areas to be rational, rejecting claims of arbitrariness. Delegation of power to the executive was deemed permissible. Capital gains tax was clarified as a tax on income, not on land. The court quashed assessment orders and directed fresh assessments excluding profits from agricultural land sales. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Jul 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36292