2026 (3) TMI 942

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 06/06/2025 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. He did not file his return of income for the year under consideration. As per information received by the Assessing Officer (AO), the assessee had sold two immovable properties during the year under consideration. Accordingly, case was re-opened by the AO u/s 147 of the Act and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued. In response, the assessee filed return of income, wherein he had shown total income of Rs. 6,88,630/- as income from other sources. Assessee did not show any capital gains income earned on the sale of the aforesaid immovable p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 8,75,97,656/- without appreciating the fact that in the sale deed at page no. 127 (Block No. 254) and at page no. 58 (block no.263), it is written that the said agricultural land was purchased for bonafide industrial purposes and the purchaser has deducted the tax at source considering the land in question as a capital asset." 5. We note that the AO had made the impugned addition observing that the land in question was a capital asset assessable to LTCG as the same was situated within the prescribed limits from the Municipal limits. Further that, the land was sold by the assessee to a company M/s.Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd. for use of the same for industrial purposes. The Ld. CIT(A), after considering the relevant evidences o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bhai Meramanbhai Odedra (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 497 (Guj.), wherein, the Hon'ble High Court has held that merely because the agricultural land was sold in favour of non-agriculturist in breach of law prevailing the State, said land would not lose its character as agricultural land and hence could not be treated as capital asset. Further, the Coordinate Surat Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bhadrabala Dhimantrai Joshi vs. ACIT in ITA No.126/SRT/2025 vide order dated 26/09/2025 has in identical facts and circumstances has held that since the land was neither converted nor developed for non-agricultural purposes prior to its sale, hence the same would not lose its character as an agricultural land and would not fall in the definition of cap....