Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (8) TMI 988 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

2015 (8) TMI 988 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - TMI - Exemption under Section 10(37) - compensation received on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land - claim denied on the ground that assessee had not fulfilled the second condition laid down under said provision for availing exemption - Held that:- We are of the view that since the finding of fact has been given by all the authorities that the appellant was not carrying on any agricultural activity in the plot in question in preceding two years .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Dummannahalli on 27.7.2006. The said land was notified for acquisition under the provisions of Karnataka Industrial Area Development Act, 1966 (for short the KIAD Act'). The final notification was published on 17.05.2007. Thereafter, on the basis of an agreement entered into on 07.10.2008, the assessee was paid a compensation of ₹ 1,47,48,750/- for the compulsory acquisition of his land which he had purchased on 27.07.2006. For the said assessment year 2009-10, the assessee-appellant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ich was acquired was an agricultural land and no capital gains would be leviable. 2. A sum of ₹ 1,47,48,750/- claiming exemption under Section 10(37) of the Act being compensation received on compulsory acquisition of agricultural land was denied by the assessing Officer on the ground that assessee had not fulfilled the second condition laid down under said provision for availing exemption. Hence, it was held that amount of compensation received by the assessee is taxable as short term cap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

We have heard Sri K.Shrihari, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri K.V.Aravind, learned counsel for the respondents at length and perused the record. 4. The moot question for determination in this appeal is with regard to the applicability of Clause (ii) of sub-section (37) of Section 10 of the Act in the facts of the present case. Said provision reads as under: "Incomes not included in total income. 10. In computing the total income of a previous year of any person, any income .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as being used for agricultural purposes by such Hindu undivided family or individual or a parent of his; (iii) such transfer is by way of compulsory acquisition under any law, or a transfer the consideration for which is determined or approved by the Central Government or the Reserve Bank of India; (iv) such income has arisen from the compensation or consideration for such transfer received by such assessee on or after the 1st day of April, 2004. Explanation-For the purposes of this clause, the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eding the date of transfer or compulsory acquisition. It is this question, which has to be considered by this Court. 5. The Assessing Officer, besides holding that the land in question was not being used for agricultural purpose for the previous two years prior to the transfer, has also held that the land having been purchased by the appellant-assessee on 27.07.2006 and the final acquisition notification having been issued on 17.05.2007, same was in possession of the assessee for less than one y .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tion during the two years prior to 07.10.2008. Such findings of fact are primarily based on the revenue records, and also some inspection which was carried out by the Assessing Officer, which we need not go into much detail. The authorities below have also taken into account the certificate issued by the Special Land Acquisition Officer at the time of taking possession of the land in question by the Karnataka Industrial Development Board wherein it was mentioned that the same was barren land and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

land. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Eucalyptus tree on the plot would be a crop and would be included for agricultural purposes. In our considered view, plantation of Eucalyptus would be plantation of trees which would not be for agricultural purpose as it does not give any agricultural produce. Thus, such contention of learned counsel for the appellant is not worthy of acceptance. 7. Even otherwise, we notice from the records that subsequently certain certificates came to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version