<?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>2024 (10) TMI 519 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759920</link>
    <description>Agricultural land remains outside the capital asset definition unless the municipal jurisdiction and population conditions in section 2(14) are satisfied on the relevant date. On the facts, village Chhatt was treated as part of a Gram Panchayat and outside Zirakpur municipal limits when the transfer and consideration occurred, and a later municipal expansion notification could not operate retrospectively. The population figure relied on by the Revenue was not accepted because the published Census data did not meet the statutory threshold. The discussion also noted the legal effect of an unregistered agreement and delivery of possession, but the land was ultimately treated as non-taxable agricultural land and the capital gains addition was reversed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Oct 2024 18:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 519 - ITAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759920</link>
      <description>Agricultural land remains outside the capital asset definition unless the municipal jurisdiction and population conditions in section 2(14) are satisfied on the relevant date. On the facts, village Chhatt was treated as part of a Gram Panchayat and outside Zirakpur municipal limits when the transfer and consideration occurred, and a later municipal expansion notification could not operate retrospectively. The population figure relied on by the Revenue was not accepted because the published Census data did not meet the statutory threshold. The discussion also noted the legal effect of an unregistered agreement and delivery of possession, but the land was ultimately treated as non-taxable agricultural land and the capital gains addition was reversed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>