Tribunal held that the land held by the assessee was agricultural land which was not a capital asset which excludes agricultural land out of the definition of capital asset. The Tribunal also held that the assessee had sold the agricultural land at a consideration which was more than the District level Committee rate. Accordingly, there was no justification for making any addition under S. 50C of the Act. Revision is held to be bad in law . ( AY..2015-16)
Satish Kumar Agarwal v. PCIT (2020) 82 ITR 40 (SN)(Jaipur ) (Trib)
S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation -Agricultural land – Not a capita asset- A sale consideration more than the district committee rate – Addition cannot be made – Revision is held to be bad in law . [ S. 2(14), 45, 263 ]