https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778459 ITAT, Chennai - The Tribunal held the agricultural land to be a "capital asset" under section 2(14)(iii)(b) given its proximity to municipal limits and absence of evidence to the contrary. It rejected the AO's adoption of Rs. 2,50,00,000 as sale consideration and directed use of the registered deed value Rs. 1,00,44,000 for computing long-term capital gains, deleting the addition of Rs. 1,49,56,000. The plea to distribute sale proceeds as ancestral property was dismissed for lack of proof. The Tribunal allowed exemption under section 54F for specified investment in a house and remitted computation to the AO accordingly. en-us Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:31:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778459 ITAT, Chennai - The Tribunal held the agricultural land to be a "capital asset" under section 2(14)(iii)(b) given its proximity to municipal limits and absence of evidence to the contrary. It rejected the AO's adoption of Rs. 2,50,00,000 as sale consideration and directed use of the registered deed value Rs. 1,00,44,000 for computing long-term capital gains, deleting the addition of Rs. 1,49,56,000. The plea to distribute sale proceeds as ancestral property was dismissed for lack of proof. The Tribunal allowed exemption under section 54F for specified investment in a house and remitted computation to the AO accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778459