Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.23 seconds)

Superintending Engineer vs Income Tax Officer. on 31 March, 1995

d. That the Hon'ble ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH 'D' incase of HitenTulshibhai Engineer v. Income-tax Officer* [2023] 157 taxmann.com 81 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) held that "Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 read with section 63AA of Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Laws (Amendment) Act, 1997 (GT & ALL) and section 65B of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 - Capital gains - Capital assets (Agricultural land)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 7 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M. R. Prabhavathy on 7 July, 2023

c. That the Hon'ble SUPREME COURT OF INDIA incase of Commissioner of Income-tax v. M. R. Prabhavathy* [2023] 154 taxmann.com 143 (SC) held that "Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Capital assets (Agricultural land) - Assessment year 2008-09 - Assessee got his agricultural lands converted for non-agricultural purpose and sold said land, however, he did not offer any capital gain to tax claiming that land was agricultural land - Revenue submitted that assessee's lands were within 8 kms. fromDevanahalli Municipality and within 8 kms. from Bengaluru Municipality (BBMP) when measured aerially, therefore, they fell within definition of capital assets under section 2(14)(iii) - Tribunal noted that, though land was converted, assessee continued agricultural operations which was evident from fact that income derived from agricultural operations declared by assessee was accepted by revenue - Further, even as per notification issued by Central Government, lands did not fall within 8 kms.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - B M Trivedi - Full Document
1   2 Next