Home Income tax Corporate Income tax Agricultural Operation Not Mandatory for Qualification as Agricultural Land

Agricultural Operation Not Mandatory for Qualification as Agricultural Land

0
Agricultural Operation Not Mandatory for Qualification as Agricultural Land
Bombay HC's Order for Ashok Chaganlal Thakkar

The Bombay Excessive Court docket, precise carrying on of agricultural operations shouldn’t be a important situation for figuring out that the parcels of land had been agricultural lands.

The order has been quashed by the bench of Justice Okay. R. Shriram and Justice Dr. Neela Gokhale and remanded the case for passing the contemporary evaluation order. The AO would analyze if the proof carried on document to verify the declare that the lands bought are like agricultural land is genuine. If the Assessing Officer (AO) refuses the applicant’s furnished proof then he carries the opposite materials on document.

The AO must conduct an inquiry to confirm the genuineness of the certificates that the applicant filed. The AO can go for the measure as required by conducting an important inquiry with the involved authorities authorities. The petitioner’s opinion can’t be denied on the presumption that the lands bought weren’t agricultural because the petitioner bought the parcels of land inside 2 years of buy.

The applicant is a person who has invested in particular parcels of land. The applicant has furnished an earnings return, declaring earnings. Underneath Part 143(1) of the Revenue Tax Act of 1961 the return of earnings was processed.

The Assessing Officer talked about that land was a capital asset and, therefore, capital achieve was levied to be paid. The AO proceeded as a result of many of the alleged agricultural land bought was held for lower than 2 years, and, therefore, the applicant’s intention was to not do any agricultural actions however to make investments and earn revenue.

No proof was furnished by the applicant, and the applicant has carried out the functioning of agriculture within the 12 months into account, AO talked about. The AO supposed that the aim of the legislature can be defeated if the exemption for the sale of agricultural land is furnished earlier than the petitioner with none agricultural actions made by the petitioner.

An enchantment earlier than the Commissioner of Revenue Tax (Appeals) is been picked by the applicant. The CIT(A) requested the petitioner to furnish the paperwork exhibiting that the parcels of land had been agricultural lands.

The petitioner furnished the paperwork from the Talati expressing that the parcels of agricultural land had been situated greater than 8 km . away from the city space and a letter from Gram Sevak in Grampanchayat certifying that the full inhabitants of those villages was 1216.

The petitioner’s rivalry was admitted by the CIT(A) that the precise carrying on of agricultural processes shouldn’t be an important situation for figuring out {that a} sure parcel of land was agricultural land. CIT(A) denied the declare of the applicant on the solitary foundation that the applicant failed to supply any proof to point out that the land bought by way of the applicant has been known as agricultural land in authorities information.

Learn Additionally: All Particulars About 5 Non-taxable Revenue As Per CBDT Dept

On the a part of CIT (A) it was incorrect to conclude that there was no proof to point out that the land was known as agricultural land in authorities information. The CIT (A) within the order has additionally recorded that the AO was requested to comment on the admissibility of the paperwork furnished by way of the petitioner and was requested to supply his reply dated March 20, 2019.

Earlier than the Revenue Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) the applicant most popular a plea. The ITAT cited that carrying on agricultural exercise was conditional on treating the parcel of land as agricultural land. The ITAT didn’t disturb the findings of CIT (A).

Really useful: All About I-T Part 54B of Capital Achieve on Land Switch

The courtroom noticed that the ITAT order should be learn and comprehended as limiting the extent of the division solely to look at the taxpayer’s proof, which is obvious from the truth that the ITAT has not disturbed the CIT(A) findings that precise carrying on of agricultural operations shouldn’t be a required situation for deciding {that a} sure parcel of land is agricultural land.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here