Mohideen Sharif Inayathulla Sharif v. ITO (2022) 95 ITR 345 (Chennai) (Trib)

S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-Revenue records are ultimate proof of the land being agricultural land-Land situated beyond prescribed Limit-Cannot be considered as non-agricultural Land. [S. 45]

A mere misstatement or confusion with regard to the identical name of 2 villages cannot form the basis for making a huge addition under the head capital gains under the surmise and suspicion that this village could be within 5 kilometer’s from the nearest municipal limits. The Tribunal  further reiterated that the revenue records are ultimate proof of the land being agricultural land and that its subsequent use is non-consequential. (AY.2011-12)