TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urposes by the assessee - Merely because the assessee was not residing close to the land or was also pursuing some other business would not by itself be sufficient to hold that the land was not used for agricultural purposes by the assessee - The Tribunal had recorded that in the earlier years, the assessee had declared agricultural income, which was also accepted by the Revenue – no substantial question of law arises for consideration – Decided against Revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 248 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 24-3-2014 - Akil Kureshi And Sonia Gokani,JJ. For the Appellant : Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt, Adv. ORDER (Per : Honourable Ms. Justice Sonia Gokani) 1. Aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( the Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ( the Act for short) and treated the same as capital gain in the year of receipt. 5. When this was challenged before the CIT (Appeals), it had concurred with the findings of the Assessing Officer that the amount received was taxable as long term capital gain. 6. This matter when travelled to the tribunal, the tribunal passed the impugned order which is under challenge before us by way of present appeal. 7. It was the plea taken by the assessee that the provisions of section 45(5) of the Act cannot be invoked when the condition of exemption under section 10(37) of the Act has not been fully satisfied. The question therefore, arose with regard to exemption under section 10(37) of the Act. This Court by order dated 15.4.2013 passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted, the Revenue contended that the assessee would not be entitled to the exemption since the agricultural land was not cultivated by the assessee himself. We may recall that the CIT (Appeals) was himself convinced that such exemption would be available even in case of a land situated in the municipal area. But that the other conditions, namely of the cultivation of such land by the assessee would be crucial. 9. We cannot dispute this proposition of the Revenue. The question is can it be stated that the assessee did not fulfill such condition. We may recall that the only ground on which the CIT (Appeals) held against the assessee was that he was staying away from the agricultural land and that he was otherwise engaged in a bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
