<?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>2026 (6) TMI 913 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793532</link>
    <description>Whether land sales constitute an adventure in the nature of trade depends on the totality of circumstances, including purchase intention, holding period, development activity, and systematic trading features; mere sale of multiple plots is not decisive. On the facts, 25 plots were bought in a single transaction, held for about six years, treated as investment in the books, and sold without evidence of organised real-estate trading, so the surplus was capital gains and not business income. The same reasoning applied to agricultural land: the transactions could not be taxed as business income, and the acquisition compensation and related additions were unsustainable. The assessment failed because the land dealings were wrongly characterised as trading activity.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 08:45:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=907565" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 913 - ITAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793532</link>
      <description>Whether land sales constitute an adventure in the nature of trade depends on the totality of circumstances, including purchase intention, holding period, development activity, and systematic trading features; mere sale of multiple plots is not decisive. On the facts, 25 plots were bought in a single transaction, held for about six years, treated as investment in the books, and sold without evidence of organised real-estate trading, so the surplus was capital gains and not business income. The same reasoning applied to agricultural land: the transactions could not be taxed as business income, and the acquisition compensation and related additions were unsustainable. The assessment failed because the land dealings were wrongly characterised as trading activity.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>