<?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>2022 (4) TMI 1624 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456482</link>
    <description>The ITAT Bangalore upheld assessments under section 153A for AY 2010-11 to 2014-15, finding valid seized materials justified the assessment framing despite the assessee&#039;s contention of change of opinion. However, the tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding income classification from agricultural land sale. The AO had treated proceeds as business income, arguing continuous buying and selling constituted adventure in trade. The ITAT held that land beyond 8 km of municipal limits, classified as agricultural in revenue records with actual cultivation, sold as acreage without conversion or development, generated exempt agricultural income under section 2(14). The tribunal found no evidence of systematic trading activities or intention to treat land as stock-in-trade, dismissing the adventure in trade theory.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Jul 2024 20:13:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=762080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1624 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456482</link>
      <description>The ITAT Bangalore upheld assessments under section 153A for AY 2010-11 to 2014-15, finding valid seized materials justified the assessment framing despite the assessee&#039;s contention of change of opinion. However, the tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee regarding income classification from agricultural land sale. The AO had treated proceeds as business income, arguing continuous buying and selling constituted adventure in trade. The ITAT held that land beyond 8 km of municipal limits, classified as agricultural in revenue records with actual cultivation, sold as acreage without conversion or development, generated exempt agricultural income under section 2(14). The tribunal found no evidence of systematic trading activities or intention to treat land as stock-in-trade, dismissing the adventure in trade theory.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>