<?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>2025 (9) TMI 945 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778456</link>
    <description>ITAT held that income from nursery and agricultural farm, though erroneously described as business in the return, was correctly treated as agricultural income and exempt under section 10(1). Noting that earlier and later assessments had accepted the agricultural character, the Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition and set aside the CIT(A) order, allowing the assessee&#039;s grounds and granting the exemption.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:31:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 945 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778456</link>
      <description>ITAT held that income from nursery and agricultural farm, though erroneously described as business in the return, was correctly treated as agricultural income and exempt under section 10(1). Noting that earlier and later assessments had accepted the agricultural character, the Tribunal directed the AO to delete the addition and set aside the CIT(A) order, allowing the assessee&#039;s grounds and granting the exemption.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778456</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>