2015 (5) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....estioning the correctness of the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 2. Heard Mr.S.Rajesh, learned counsel for the appellant. 3. The assessee, who is the respondent, is an individual. She filed a return of income for the assessment year 2009-2010 on 31.7.2009, admitting a total income of Rs. 1,04,880/-. Later, the case was taken up for scrutiny. After verifying the books of accoun....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Commissioner of Income Tax dated 7.2.2014, the assessee filed an appeal in I.T.A.No.1081/Mds/2014 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal, by order dated 5.9.2014, allowed the appeal, holding that the assessee was actually a full time student undergoing MBBS course and that she is not indulging in any business activity and it was a case of change of opinion. Aggrieved by the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....course and that therefore, she could not have indulged in any business activity. It was one of the reasons adduced by the Tribunal for coming to the conclusion that it did. 9. A careful look at the order of the Tribunal would show that the assessee got the property by way of settlement. Thereafter, she entered into a promoter's agreement on 18.12.2007 and a construction agreement on 30.3.2008....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at in Raja Rameshwara Rao Bahadur, the Supreme Court held that when a person acquired the land with a view to selling it later after developing it, he is carrying on an activity resulting in profit and the activity can only be described as a business venture. But, the case on hand stands on a different footing. The assessee did not acquire any land for the purpose of development and sale as part o....