1984 (7) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rming and that the same was used for agricultural Purposes ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the sale of land by the assessee-company did not constitute art adventure in the nature of trade ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the Department has failed to discharge the onus to prove that the sale transaction tantamounted to an adventure in the nature of trade ? " The Tribunal took the view that out of the aforesaid three questions, only question No. 2 was a question of law that arose from its order dated August 7, 1976, and it, therefore, referred only the said question No. 2 for the opinion of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in 1966 and remaining land sold on 28-6-69). The ITO held that the investment of the assessee constituted an adventure in the nature of trade and, therefore, taxed accordingly the profits accruing to the assessee from the sale transactions of the given plots of land. The stand of the assessee-company before the ITO was that the said plots of land were purchased for agricultural purposes. The plea of the assessee, on appeal, prevailed with the AAC who expressly held that the land was purchased for agricultural purposes and the same had been used for that purpose by the assessee. The Tribunal, to which the matter was taken by the Revenue, upheld the decision of the AAC and found as a fact that the said three plots had been purchased by....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the tubewell could serve some other purpose also in addition to the purpose of putting the land to agricultural use, the Tribunal cannot be faulted in drawing support for its finding from the factum of installation of the tubewell on the land that the land was initially intended by the assessee, when it bought the same, to put it to agricultural use. The initial intention with which the land was purchased by the assessee is alone relevant. That intention can be either one which the assessee is asserting or that which the Revenue is mentioning. These two intentions are mutually exclusive. If one is present, the other is out. Once the Tribunal held, and with some justification, that the assessee purchased the land with the intention of....