Assessee got their agricultural lands converted for non-agricultural purpose. The assessee sold the part of the land and claimed as eempt. The Assessing Office held that the land was assessable as capital gains. As per Certificate of Tahasildar and PWD Engineer’s Certificate, distance between lands in question and BBMP was more than 8 kms. Tribunal had recorded that, though land was converted, assessee had continued agricultural operations which was evident from fact that income derived from agricultural operations declared by assessees were accepted by revenue even as per Notification issued by Central Government, lands did not fall within 8 kms from BBMP. The Tribunal held that the assessee was not liable to capital gains. Court also held that inclusion of lands in Special Zone cannot be a determining factor, hence, mere inclusion of land without any infrastructure development does not convert land into non-agricultural land. (AY. 2008-09)
CIT v. M.R. Anandaram (HUF) (2022) 289 Taxman 121 / 216 DTR 432/ 328 CTR 90/(2023) 450 ITR 94 (Karn.)(HC)/Editorial: SLP of Revenue is dismissed , CIT v. M.R. Anandaram ( 2023) 453 ITR 757 ( SC)
S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-Capital gains-agricultural lands converted for non-agricultural purpose-lands did not fall within 8 kms from Municipality of Bangalore-Continued agriculrural operation-Mere inclusion of land in Special Zone without any infrastructure development does not convert land into non-agricultural land-Not liable to capital gain tax. [S. 45]