251 orders · Page 6 of 6
The Tribunal held that the land in question qualifies as agricultural land and is situated beyond the prescribed distance from the municipal limits. Regarding the agricultural activity, the Tribunal found no requirement in any Act that only self-cultivated land is treated as agricultural land. Since one of the brothers was carrying out agricultural operations, any income derived would be treated as agricultural income. The Tribunal noted that part of the same land owned by another brother was treated as agricultural land, making it unjustified to treat a portion of the same chunk differently. Concerning the distance from municipal limits, the Tribunal relied on multiple documents, including reports from the Income Tax Inspector, Executive Engineer PWD, Tehsildar, and Land Surveyor, as well as a Google map, all indicating the land is situated beyond 9 km from the municipal limit. The Tribunal found these certificates credible and not challenged by the department. The population of the village was also below the threshold specified in Section 2(14)(iii)(a). The Tribunal distinguished the cases relied upon by the Revenue, finding them factually different. The Tribunal concluded that the findings of the appellate authorities were correct and based on appreciation of evidence and various High Court decisions. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose, and the appeal was dismissed. The operative direction was dismissal of the Revenue's appeal.
Showing 251–251 of 251 · Page 6 of 6
