Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.30 seconds)Cit vs Smt. Savita Rani on 22 May, 2002
"8. It is well settled in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Savita Rani (2004) 186 CTR (P&H)
240 : (2004) 270 ITR 40 (P&H), wherein it is held that the land being located
in a commercial area or the land having been partially utilised for non-
agricultural purposes or that the vendees had also purchased it for non-
agricultural purposes, were totally irrelevant consideration for the purposes of
application of s. 54B.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs Siddharth J. Desai on 22 September, 1981
44. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim
(204 ITR 631) has approved the decision of a Division Bench of the Hon'ble
Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Siddharth J. Desai (1982) 28 CTR (Guj)
148 : (1983) 139 ITR 628 (Guj) and has laid down 13 tests or factors which are
required to be considered and upon consideration of which, the question
whether the land is an agricultural land or not has got to be decided or
answered. We reproduce the said 13 tests as follows :
Motibhai D. Patel vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat on 6 October, 1980
46. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dr. Motibhai D. Patel vs. CIT
(1982) 27 CTR (Guj) 238 : (1981) 127 ITR 671 (Guj) referring to the
Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court had stated that if
agricultural operations are being carried on in the land in question at the time
when the land is sold and further if the entries in the Revenue records show
that the land in question is agricultural land, then, a presumption arises that
the land is agricultural in character and unless that presumption is rebutted
by evidence led by the Revenue, it must be held that the land was agricultural
in character at the time when it was sold. The Division Bench of the Hon'ble
Gujarat High Court further held that there was nothing on record to show that
Vinod Parasmal Jain 15
ITA No. 1883/M/2020
the presumption raised from the long user of the land for agricultural purpose
and also the presumption arising from the entries of the Revenue records are
rebutted.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs Manilal Somnath on 25 March, 1976
48. We may also refer to the case of CIT vs. Manilal Somnath (1977) 106 ITR
917 (Guj), wherein the Division Bench of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court
observed that the potential non-agricultural value of the land for which a
purchaser may be prepared to pay a large price would not detract from its
character as agricultural land on the relevant date of sale.
Gopal C. Sharma vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 11 October, 1993
8.2 The decision of Tribunal in the case of Sita Ram Sharma (supra) relied
upon, the Bench followed the decision in the case of Smt. Kamala Devi Sharma
dated 23.03.2011 and the no addition in the case of co-owner was only factual
observation. Thus ratio of said decision does not apply over facts of the case.
During the course of the hearing before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee was
specifically asked, whether the assessee can produce Shri Rakesh B. Kulkarni
before the Assessing Officer for verification. He agreed for producing Shri
Rakesh B. Kulkarni before the Assessing Officer for verification of agricultural
activity carried out by him. The Ld. counsel also agreed for furnishing other
documentary evidence in support of expenses and sale of grass. In our opinion
these evidence goes to the root of the issue whether in agricultural activity was
carried on such land. Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, we feel it
appropriate to restore this issue to the file of the Ld. Assessing Officer for
deciding afresh. The assessee is directed to comply as per the undertaking given
by the Ld. counsel of the assessee for producing Shri Rakesh B. Kulkarni before
the Assessing Officer and file documentary evidence in support of expenses
incurred for carrying out agricultural activity and sale proceeds from sale of the
Vinod Parasmal Jain 19
ITA No. 1883/M/2020
grass to nearby dairies.
Smt. Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim And ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Gujarat on 14 September, 1993
The Assessing Officer may also carry out any other
enquiry which he deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case so as to
satisfy the conditions of constituting agricultural land as laid in decision
discussed in above paras including decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt.
Sarifabibi Mohmed Ibrahim (supra) and Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy (supra).
Accordingly, the ground No. one and two of the appeal of the assessee allowed
for statistical purposes.