Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2018 (5) TMI 744

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....einafter referred to as the ' Act' ) computing the total income at Rs. 65,13,730/-, against the total income of Rs. 1,100/- declared by the assessee in his return was partly reversed. 2. The brief fact of the case is that the assessee purchased agricultural land in different sizes from different parties totalling measuring 329 .00 decimal on various dates in the year 2006, the details whereof are given in the assessment order. The consideration amount for such purchase was Rs. 13,87,365/- for the financial year 2006-07. On 25.06.2009 the said land was sold to one Utkarsh Metal Industries Pvt. Ltd for a consideration of Rs. 74,00,000/- relating to A.Y.2010-11. This resulted in a gain of Rs. 60,12,635/-. 3. According to the AO no agricu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he ld. DR while arguing the matter, supported the contention made by the AO in his order dated 30.03.2013. According to him there was no agricultural activity during 2006 to 2009 on that particular land. He further pointed out that the assessee failed to produce supporting evidence to prove the land to be a agricultural land before the AO and that no documents were submitted, which will prove that agricultural operation are made on the particular land. He further contended that this is an area with industrial growth for the last couple of years and that the assessee purchased the land for industrial use. He sought to substantiate his argument with the fact of change of price, where the value of land rose to Rs. 74,00,000/- from Rs. 13,87,36....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a committee, town area committee, town committee, or by any other name) or a cantonment board and which has a population of not less than ten thousand or (b) In any area within the distance, measured aerially - I) not being more than two kilometres, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to in item (a) and which has a population of more than ten thousand but not exceeding one lakh; or II) not being more than six kilometres, from the local limits of any municipality or cantonment board referred to item (a) and which has a population of more than one lakh but not exceeding ten lakh; or III) not being more than eight kilometres, from the local limits of any municipality or can....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ussed hereinabove and the intention of the legislature along with relevant sections, I am of the opinion that a particular land is agricultural land or not depends upon so many factors. Any agricultural income derived from agricultural operations will qualify for agricultural income. So far as capital gains on the sale of such land is concerned, it also depends upon factors like location of the land, use of the land, distance from municipal limit, whether land use was changed, etc. If all these factors are cumulatively kept in mind, one fact emerges that the impugned land is situated beyond the prescribed limit from the municipality, recorded as agricultural land in the revenue record, agricultural operation was done by one caretaker, hence....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d is to be considered as agricultural land until proved otherwise. Admittedly, the term "capital asset" has an all embracing connotation and includes every kind of property as generally understood except those are expressly excluded from the definition. It is exactly the case here because section 2(l4)(iii) expressly defines agricultural land with regard to its location and distance from the municipal limit. It seems that the learned Assessing Officer has not examined the documents produced by the assessee establishing the distance of land beyond prescribed municipal limit and more specifically when Khasra number, etc. has been duly mentioned in the report of Tehsildar. So far as the argument of the AO that the land was sold at a substantia....