{"id":61031,"date":"2026-06-25T10:16:04","date_gmt":"2026-06-25T04:46:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/natesan-ekambaram-v-dcit-2025-214-itd-615-chennaitrib\/"},"modified":"2026-06-25T10:16:04","modified_gmt":"2026-06-25T04:46:04","slug":"natesan-ekambaram-v-dcit-2025-214-itd-615-chennaitrib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/natesan-ekambaram-v-dcit-2025-214-itd-615-chennaitrib\/","title":{"rendered":"Natesan Ekambaram. v. DCIT (2025) 214 ITD 615 (Chennai)(Trib.)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Assessee sold a parcel of land to a company through a power of attorney (POA) and received sale consideration of a certain amount-Assessing Officer held that the land sold by assessee was a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) and, accordingly, brought the sale consideration to tax as capital gains.\u00a0\u00a0 CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal, the Tribunal held that by virtue of the 2011 expansion of Greater Chennai Corporation, a village was included within corporation limits, and the distance between said village and the land was less than 8 kms. Consequently, in view of the statutory prescription of section 2(14)(iii)(b),\u00a0 land was to be regarded as a capital asset. Since assessee had not been able to establish, with cogent evidence, that the distance between said village and impugned land exceeded 8 kms, the land constituted a &#8216;capital asset&#8217; within the meaning of section 2(14) and that transfer thereof during the assessment year was liable to capital gains tax. (AY. 2014-15)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 2(14)(iii) : Capital asset-Agricultural land-Capital gains-Failed to prove that distance from municipal limits exceeded 8 kms,-land constituted capital asset under section 2(14) and liable to capital gains tax.[S. 2(14),2(14)(iii)(b), 45] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-61031","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fSn","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61031","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=61031"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61031\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":61032,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61031\/revisions\/61032"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61031"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61031"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61031"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}