ABDUL SATTAR ABDUL KADAR BAWLA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, JALNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 660/PUN/2021Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 July 2022AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the land acquisition proceedings treated the lands as agricultural and not barren, a fact not considered by the lower authorities. Therefore, the Assessing Officer was directed to re-adjudicate the issue.

What were the facts?

The assessees claimed exemption under Section 10(37) for land acquired, but the Assessing Officer disallowed a portion of the exemption, considering some land to be barren. The lower authorities also did not fully grant the exemption.

What were the issues?

Whether the entire acquired land was agricultural and eligible for exemption under Section 10(37), or if a portion was barren and thus ineligible.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(37),Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI S. S. GODARA

For Appellant: Shri K. Shrinivasan
For Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani
Hearing: 25.07.2022Pronounced: 25.07.2022

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.659/PUN/2021
ITA No.660/PUN/2021

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER

More judgments on Section 10(37)

All 558 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(37) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →