Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2023 (4) TMI 856 - AT - Income TaxBelated employees contribution of ESI PF under respective statutes - HELD THAT - We noted that this issue is now settled by the decision of M/s. Checkmate Services P.Ltd 2022 (10) TMI 617 - SUPREME COURT Admittedly these payments are made beyond due dates as prescribed under respective statues which is not disputed by the assessee s counsel. Hence we dismiss this issue of assessee s appeal. Assessment of capital gains on sale of agricultural land or landed property - Nature of land sold - Calculation of distance to get jurisdiction of municipality - as per section 2(14)(iii)(a) the village population is to be considered for ascertaining whether the land is capital asset or not - whether clause (a) or clause (b) to section 2(14)(iii) will apply to the present dispute? - HELD THAT - Interpretation of provisions of section 2(14)(iii) sub-clause (a) clearly applies in case where land falls in any area which comprised within the jurisdiction of municipality and which has population of not less than ten thousand. Hence in the present case meaning of clause (a) to section 2(14)(iii) agricultural land in India not being land situated within jurisdiction of municipality and which municipality has population of not less than ten thousand is to be read together. In the present case as argued by the Sr.DR the assessee s case clearly falls under clause (b)(ii) to provisions of section 2(14)(iii) reason being assessee s land is outside Hindupur Municipal limits at a distance of 4 kms measured aerially and as per provisional report of Census of India population of Hindupur Municipality in 2011 is 151677. Hence the AO has rightly charged assessee s land to capital gain tax and the CIT(A) has rightly affirmed the same. Decided against assessee.
|