Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

ITAT Hyderabad Grants Major Relief to Assessee’s Family – Agricultural Land & JDA Disputes Resolved

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 7953
Case Name
Ramesh Babu Nimmatoori Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2017-18
Advertisement

Ramesh Babu Nimmatoori Vs ACIT (ITAT Hyderabad)

ITAT Hyderabad Grants Major Relief to Assessee’s Family – Agricultural Land & JDA Disputes Resolved

Hyderabad  Tribunal  delivered a common order disposing of 15 appeals by six family members (Ramesh Babu, Raja Babu, Yashoda, Sulochana, Manjusha & Anudeep) and two by Revenue. The matters arose out of search in Aurora Educational Society group, leading to multiple additions on land dealings, capital gains, advances, JDAs & unexplained investments.

1. Sale of Agricultural Land – Not a Capital Asset

  • Assessees sold 4 acres at Raigiri village to M/s Incredible India Projects Pvt. Ltd.
  • AO taxed gains holding land fell under HMDA limits → treated as capital asset u/s 2(14).
  • Tribunal, relying on Tehsildar & Bhongir Municipality certificates, held land was beyond 2 km from Municipality, population 53,339, hence agricultural.
  • Addition of ₹1.35 crore (Ramesh Babu’s case) deleted

2. Advance from Aishwarya Infra Developers – Not Taxable u/s 56(2)(ix)

  • Family entered agreement (14.09.2016) with Aishwarya Infra Developers for ~29 acres; received ₹5.18 crore advance.
  • Deal later shifted to JVG Structures Pvt. Ltd. under JDA (30.06.2017), with Aishwarya also party.
  • AO taxed advance as forfeiture u/s 56(2)(ix).
  • Tribunal: No forfeiture, but carried forward into JDA; plus land was agricultural.
  • Addition of ₹79.35 lakh (Ramesh Babu) deleted

3. Joint Development Agreement with JVG Structures (2017)

  • AO taxed capital gains in AY 2018-19 at FMV (₹14.70 cr), invoking s.45(1).
  • Tribunal: Applied Section 45(5A) – capital gains taxable only in year of completion certificate, not in year of JDA.
  • Since no completion certificate, addition of ₹3.12 crore (Ramesh Babu share) deleted

4. Additions under Section 56(2)(x) – Banjara Hills Property

  • Assessees bought land at Road No.12, Banjara Hills in Aug 2017 for ₹3 crore; SRO value ₹4.20 crore.
  • AO taxed difference u/s 56(2)(x).
  • Tribunal upheld CIT(A) – difference of ₹24.07 lakh (Ramesh Babu’s share) sustained

5. Unexplained Investment – Jubilee Hills Property

  • Land & building at Road No.40, Jubilee Hills purchased; AO added ₹13 lakh in Ramesh Babu’s hands.
  • Tribunal found payment recorded in Raja Babu’s books, not assessee’s.
  • Addition of ₹13 lakh deleted

6. Cash Seized During Search

  • Cash of ₹28.06 lakh found. AO added u/s 69A.
  • Tribunal accepted explanation that cash came from declared income of AYs 2016–2018.
  • Addition deleted

7. Other Issues

  • Increases in capital accounts explained from agricultural land sales – additions deleted.
  • Family pension receipts, unexplained deposits, Edupalle land investment etc. partly remanded.
  • Revenue’s appeals (on relief granted by CIT(A)) dismissed.

8. Tribunal’s Final Decision

  • Most additions on land sales, advances & JDAs deleted.
  • Only addition sustained: ₹24.07 lakh u/s 56(2)(x) for Banjara Hills property.
  • Appeals of assessees largely allowed, Revenue appeals dismissed.

FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD

Paid content

Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Vijayakumar Shetty
Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: Shetty & Co, Chartered Accountants, Mangalore
Location: Mangalore, Karnataka
Articles Published: 6,941

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.