9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 826X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the transaction was in the nature of adventure in trade. 2. treating the purchase of land as investment whereas the assessee never did agriculture activity on the land but immediately sold within 17 months on a profit of Rs. 35,00,000/- which constitute the transaction as adventure in the nature of trade with the intention to earn the profit. 3. deleting the interest income Rs. 67,665/- earned by the assessee as accrued interest on FDR on mere plea of the assessee that interest was not accrued. That the appellant reserves its right to add, amend or alter the grounds or appeal on or before the date of the appeal is finally heard." 2. The issue vide grounds No. 1 & 2 relates to the deletion of addition of Rs. 35,00,000/- made by the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opy of notification published in "Rajasthan Gazette" dated 06/02/2009. The Patwari of the village Pal in response to the letter, written to Tehsildar Jodhpur stated vide letter dated 18/11/2011 that khasra No. 371 village Pal was "Khatedari Land" and situated at 13 kms. away from the limits of Nagar Nigam, Johpur. The Assessing Officer asked the assessee to clarify the purpose for the purchase and sale of the agricultural land. The assessee submitted that the purpose for purchase of this land was agriculture, but the water level was found very thin and there were no desired results from the agricultural land, therefore, the assessee decided to sale the agricultural land and that the assessee was not doing business of sale and purchase of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not taxable as per the provisions of clause (iii) of the sub-section (14) of section 2 of the Act. It was also stated that the intention of the assessee was to make investment and to cultivate the agricultural land, which has to be accepted as correct unless it was found that the assessee's intention was to earn profit. Reliance was placed on the following case-laws:- 1. ITAT, Hyderabad Bench in the case of Ms. K. Radhika & Ors. Vs. DCIT, reported in 65 DTR. 2. Hon'ble MP High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Suresh Chandra Goyal reported in 163 Taxman. 3. Hon'ble Bombay High court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Debbie Alemo reported in 331 ITR 59 (Bom.) 4. ITAT Jodhpur Bench in the case of Shanti Lal Soni. 5. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as more than 08 kms. away from the municipal limits of Jodhpur. Therefore, as per the provisions contained in section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Act, the present land being agricultural land situated beyond 08 kms. of the municipal limits was not a capital asset, therefore, the profit earned by the assessee on the sale of the said land was not a capital gain. Moreover, this was the first transaction of the assessee with a sole intention to keep the land available for cultivation. In our opinion, the Assessing Officer was not justified in treating the profit earned by the assessee on the land in question as business profit. We, therefore, considering the totality of the facts are of the view that the learned CIT(A) was justified in deleting the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
