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

2016 (3) TMI 744 - ITAT CHENNAI

2016 (3) TMI 744 - ITAT CHENNAI - TMI - Profit on sale of the land - claim of the assessee for exemption as agricultural income rejected - Held that:- The fact that the land is classified as agricultural land is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the assessee has returned agricultural income year after year. The adangal extract clearly shows that the land in question was subjected to agricultural operation. Therefore, it was obvious that the land is an agricultural land. Therefore, t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

titute “revenue” within the meaning of Section 2(1A)(a) of the Act. In view of the above, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(Appeals) has rightly found that the profit on sale of the land has to be classified as agricultural income. - Decided in favour of assessee

Computation of profit u/s 115JB - Minimum alternate tax (MAT) - Only contention of the assessee is while computing book profit under Section 115JB the agricultural income cannot form part of book profit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

while computing income under Section 115JB of the Act. Therefore, this Tribunal is unable to uphold the order of the CIT(Appeals) on this issue. By following the order of Cochin Bench of this Tribunal in Harrisons Malayalam Ltd. (2009 (5) TMI 124 - ITAT COCHIN ), the orders of the lower authorities are set aside. The Assessing Officer is directed to reduce the profit on sale of agricultural land from the book profit for the purpose of computing income under Section 115JB of the Act. - Decided in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e heard both the appeals together and disposing of the same by this common order. 2. Dr. Milind Madhukar Bhusari, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee-company sold agricultural land measuring 15.14 acres at Keezhakottaiyur and Mambakkam Village for a total consideration of ₹ 56,24,95,297/- to M/s Smart Value Homes Limited, Mumbai. The assessee claimed the profit on sale of the land as exempt under Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act& .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

factor to decide the nature of land in the hands of the assessee. Placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Sri M.S. Srinivasa Naicker v. ITO (292 ITR 481), the Commissioner found that the land in question is agricultural land. According to the Ld. D.R., no agriculturist would purchase the land at the price at which the land was sold by the assessee-company and the buyer has purchased the land for promoting real estate, therefore, the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in treating 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

as subjected to cultivation. The assessee has also returned agricultural income in regular course. It is not the case of the Assessing Officer that the land is not subjected to cultivation. The only objection of the Assessing Officer is that the assessee sold the land at an exorbitant rate and the purchaser is a real estate dealer. Placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Sri M.S. Srinivasa Naickar (supra), the Ld. representative submitted that on identical set of facts, the Madr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

into industrial plot, the land in question cannot be construed as agricultural land. In those factual circumstances, the Madras High Court found that the land is classified as agricultural land and the agricultural operations were carried by the assessee. By placing reliance on the earlier judgments in M. Venkatesan v. CIT (1983) 144 ITR 886, CIT v. P.J. Thomas (1995) 211 ITR 897 and in CWT v. E. Udayakumar (2006) 284 ITR 511, it was found that the purpose for which the buyer has purchased the l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ted that when the land was classified as agricultural land in revenue records and which was evidenced by the adangal, the same has to be treated as agricultural land. The High Court further found that prior to the date of sale, it may not be necessary to carry out the agricultural operations. 5. The Ld. representative for the assessee has also placed reliance on the decision of Cochin Bench of this Tribunal in Harissons Malayalam Ltd. v. ACIT (2009) 32 SOT 497 and submitted that the amount of in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch is available at page 59 of the paper-book, the Ld. representative submitted that capital gains arising from the transfer of the agricultural land will not constitute revenue within the meaning of Section 2(1A)(a) of the Act. The Ld. representative further submitted that the profit on sale of agricultural land constitutes agricultural income as observed by the CBDT in the above circular. Therefore, the capital gains arising on sale of the land cannot form part of book profit for the purpose of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

exigible to capital gains tax being in the nature of agricultural income. In fact, according to the Ld. representative, the computation of book profit under Section 115JB of the Act was raised by the assessee in the assessee s appeal. Therefore, the Ld. representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) is not justified in not reducing the profit on sale of the agricultural land while computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. 6. We have considered the rival submissions on either side 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

e year after year. The adangal extract, which is available at pages 29 to 34 of the paperbook, clearly shows that the land in question was subjected to agricultural operation. Therefore, it was obvious that the land is an agricultural land. Therefore, the profit arising out of such land has to be treated as agricultural income as found by the Apex Court in Singhai Rakesh Kumar (supra) and All India Tea and Trading Co. Ltd. (supra) which was followed by the decision of Cochin Bench of this Tribun .....

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