Income Tax

Water logged land comprised within backwaters held agricultural land when sold along with adjacent agricultural land

Water logged land comprised within backwaters held agricultural land. The land was a kayal land and sold along with adjacent agricultural land-High Court

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2430 (2018) 07 HC

The assessee had sold two land, lying contiguously out of which the one was in backwaters (Kayal). The Assessing Officer found that approx 75% of land was agricultural land. However remaing part was a water-logged area, being comprised in the backwaters and, hence, there could be no classification as an agricultural land.

Therefore the AO, assessed capital gain on that portion of land, which was held to be water-logged and part of backwaters.

The Tribunal accepted the contention of the assessee that the Kayal portion was used for irrigating the other portion of the land. It was found that the Kayal land had acquired the character of a water tank, used for the irrigation of the other land.

The Tribunal held that the Kayal portion of the land could not have different character from that of the main land and the same treatment had to be given to it

Aggrieved with the order of the ITAT, the Revenue approached the Hon’ble High Court and contended that the approach of the Tribunal in equating waterlogged area with backwaters was factually and legally wrong.

The Hon’ble High Court noticed that the Assessing Officer had accepted the fact that major areas of the land sold by the assessee was agricultural land. The adjacent land which was lying as Kayal land and water-logged, would only had made the adjacent land more fertile and admittedly it was not used for any other purpose. The adjacent land remaining as water-logged and comprised within the backwaters, sold along with the agricultural land, could be deemed to be only agricultural land.

The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the appeal by answeting the questions of law against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • RTI

Lokayukta Police not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005 – SC

Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation  and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…

15 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST

Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…

3 days ago
  • ICAI

CA Misconduct – Order quashed as judgment not passed by same members who heard arguments.

CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…

5 days ago
  • Insurance

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act – SC

Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…

5 days ago
  • Income Tax

CIT notice u/s 263 quashed as AO rightly took DVO value of property as actual sale price

CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…

7 days ago
  • GST

Extension of timeline for implementation of Ship To GSTIN & Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities

Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…

7 days ago