Case Law Details
Case Name : Krishna Murthy Vallu Vs. ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
Related Assessment Year : 2007- 08
Courts :
All ITAT ITAT Visakhapatnam
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Krishna Murthy Vallu Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)- If land which is sold is situated in an area which is comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality, etc, then the said land is squarely covered by clause (a) of section 2(14)(iii) and would fall in the category of “Capital assets” even if it is held to be agricultural land. However, the assessee would be entitled for an exemption under section 54B on the reinvestment made by him in the purchase of another agricultural land subject to fulfilment of certain conditions.
The AO is not required to make a reference to the valuation offi...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Facts of the case: Assessee is a farmer and holds agricultural land for past 10 years. He entered into a sale agreement with buyer and at the request of the buyer, he converted the said land and sold it the very next day post conversion. Land was converted as buyer could not buy agricultural land. Assessee reinvested proceeds in another agr land and claimed exemption u/s 54B ITO not allowing 54B as on day of sale, land is not agri land. Seek your view with citations, especially Karnataka High Court Thanks in Advance
C.A Chetan Bharath
Facts of the case: Assessee is a farmer and holds agricultural land for past 10 years. He entered into a sale agreement with buyer and at the request of the buyer, he converted the said land and sold it the very next day post conversion. Land was converted as buyer could not buy agricultural land. Assessee reinvested proceeds in another agr land and claimed exemption u/s 54B ITO not allowing 54B as on day of sale, land is not agri land. Seek your view with citations, especially Karnataka High Court Thanks in Advance
C.A Chetan Bharath
Facts of the case: Assessee is a farmer and holds agricultural land for past 10 years. He entered into a sale agreement with buyer and at the request of the buyer, he converted the said land and sold it the very next day post conversion. Land was converted as buyer could not buy agricultural land. Assessee reinvested proceeds in another agr land and claimed exemption u/s 54B ITO not allowing 54B as on day of sale, land is not agri land. Seek your view with citations, especially Karnataka High Court Thanks in Advance
C.A Chetan Bharath