S.2(14)(iii): Capital asset-Agricultural land-Land is not used for agricultural purposes-Self-serving ledger entries-Property was sold before starting agricultural activity – Failed to file affidavit under Rule 10 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, pointing out that none of the Commissioner’s findings were contrary to the evidence on record or that the Commissioner or other authorities had grossly misread the documents on record- No substantial question of law – Order of Tribunal is affirmed. [S. 45, 260A, ITAT Rules, 1963 R. 10.]
The assessee sold the agricultural land and claimed the sale consideration is exempt tax as the property sold was used for the agricultural purposes . The assessee contended that the 7/12 extract (land revenue record) indicated that this land was used for agricultural purpose . The Assessing Officer , CIT(A) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal have recorded concurrent findings of facts that the land in question was not used for any agricultural purpose and therefore, the income derived from sale of land is chargeable to tax. On appeal the Court held that merely on the basis of self- serving ledger entries , cannot be basis to treat the sale of land as agricultural land . On the facts the property was sold before starting agricultural activity . The Court also held the assessee has failed to file affidavit under Rule 10 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, pointing out that none of the findings were contrary to the evidence on record or that the Commissioner or other authorities had grossly misread the documents on record. Accordingly the High Court held that no substantial question of law and the order of the Tribunal is affirmed. (ITA No.2011 of 2018 dt. 13-2-2025) (AY 2011-12)
Prashant Jaipal Reddy v. ITO (Bom.)(HC) www.itatonline.org
[Coram : Hon’ble Shri Justice M. S. Sonak & Hon’ble Shri Justice Jitendra Jain]