https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752097 The ITAT Jaipur upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings under section 148, finding the AO had jurisdiction to reopen assessment based on relevant information indicating income escapement. However, the tribunal ruled that agricultural land in question did not constitute a capital asset under section 2(14) based on municipal certificates regarding distance and population. Since the property was not a capital asset, provisions of section 56(2)(viib) regarding deemed income from property transactions were not applicable. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed, with the addition under section 56(2)(viib) being deleted while the reopening validity was sustained. en-us Tue, 30 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 May 2024 09:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752097 The ITAT Jaipur upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings under section 148, finding the AO had jurisdiction to reopen assessment based on relevant information indicating income escapement. However, the tribunal ruled that agricultural land in question did not constitute a capital asset under section 2(14) based on municipal certificates regarding distance and population. Since the property was not a capital asset, provisions of section 56(2)(viib) regarding deemed income from property transactions were not applicable. The assessee's appeal was partly allowed, with the addition under section 56(2)(viib) being deleted while the reopening validity was sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 30 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752097