SARITA MAHESH PANDEY,AKOLA vs. ITO WARD-3, AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 25/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 April 2026AY 2020-20216 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is to examine whether the land is agricultural and thus exempt, or if it's a capital asset, compute the capital gains with due consideration to the valuation report.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed exemption on the sale of agricultural land, stating it was not a capital asset. The Assessing Officer added the sale proceeds as unexplained income. The CIT(A) deleted the addition for unexplained income but upheld the addition for long-term capital gains due to lack of evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the land sold qualifies as agricultural land and is thus exempt from capital gains tax, and alternatively, how to compute capital gains if it is considered a capital asset.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(14),Section 10(1),Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Sanghani
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Hearing: 13.03.2026Pronounced: 13.04.2026

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, न गपुर SMC बेंच, 4. न गपुर / DR, ITAT, “Nagpur SMC Bench, Nagpur ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5.

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, नागपुर/ ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 2(14)

All 1,130 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(14) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →