← All Phrases

“agricultural income”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(1A) / Rule 7, 7A, 7B(1), 7B(1A), 82,868 judgments

The decision most relied on for agricultural income is CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF) (315 ITR 1), cited in 363 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on agricultural income

CIT v. Ghanshyam (HUF)
315 ITR 1 · 2009 · Supreme Court
363
citing judgments

Interest received under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is considered part of the enhanced compensation on compulsory acquisition of land. It is taxable as 'capital gains' and not separately as 'interest income' under the head Income from Other Sources.

CIT v. Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd.
389 ITR 68 · 2016 · High Court
192
citing judgments

Income earned by a cooperative society from investing its surplus funds in short-term deposits and securities is not attributable to its core activities and therefore not eligible for deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

Mavilayi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT
414 ITR 67 · 2019 · High Court
190
citing judgments

The Full Bench of the Kerala High Court held that a co-operative bank or society is not entitled to a deduction under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act if it provides loans to non-members. This decision was subsequently overruled by the Supreme Court.

Smt. Harshila Chordia v. ITO
298 ITR 349 · 2008 · High Court
187
citing judgments

Cash receipts from customers against genuine delivery of goods or services cannot be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The case also provides guidance on non-disallowance under Section 40A(3) for business payments made in specific contexts like agricultural markets.

Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. v. Assessing Officer
154 Taxmann.com 305 · 2023 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

Section 80P(4) is not applicable to a cooperative bank unless it is classified as a 'bank' under the provisions of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. For cooperative banks not meeting this definition, the deduction for interest earned from investments in cooperative societies is available under Section 80P(2)(d) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Raja Benoy Kumar Sahas Roy
32 ITR 466 · 1957 · Supreme Court
132
citing judgments

Income is considered agricultural income, exempt under Section 10(1), only if the land undergoes a measure of cultivation involving basic primary operations prior to germination and subsequent post-germination activities requiring human skill and labour.

Sabarkhanta Zilla Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. v. ClT
203 ITR 1027 · 1993 · Supreme Court
98
citing judgments

Co-operative societies or banks engaged in both agricultural and non-agricultural activities are entitled to deduction under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961, limited only to the profits derived from agricultural activities, not 100% of their gross profits.

CIT v. Usha Stud Agricultural Farms Ltd.
301 ITR 384 · 2008 · High Court
98
citing judgments

An addition cannot be made under Section 68 for cash credits if it is established that the credits do not pertain to the impugned assessment year but relate to earlier assessment years.

Judgments citing agricultural income

Kolandasamy, Erode vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Erode

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 1601/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1601/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Kolandasamy Ito बनाम/ Vannankadu Pudhu Valasu, Ward-2(2), Goundachipalayam(Po) Erode. Vs. Erode-638 112. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bxkpk-5482-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate From Erode) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Kavitha (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29-08-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate from Erode) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69A

assessee’s case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 12-03-2019. The assessee disclosed capital gains of Rs.0.41 Lacs and agricultural income of Rs.9.37 Lacs. In support, the assessee furnished VAO certificate in respect of land holdings and details of agricultural income derived by the assessee ... submitted that the assessee’s father was doing farming on ancestral property and fetched agricultural income which was accumulated and it was to be distributed to the assessee and his two children. The assessee furnished copy of unregistered will dated 06-09-2010 according to which the assessee

Nagarajan, Vellore vs. ACIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 1557/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1557/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Nagarajan Pr. Cit (Central) बनाम/ Old No.74A, New No.26, Chennai-1. Thenpalli Village& Post Vs. Katpadi Tk, Vellore Dist.-632 515. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacpn-0012-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Y. Sridhar (Fca) - Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22-08-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 03-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar (FCA) - Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 132Section 142Section 153CSection 263Section 68Section 69

jewellery belonged to the three daughters of the assessee whereas the remaining Jewellery was purchased out of withdrawals, drawings of earlier years out of agricultural income, rental income and interest income. To make- up for shortfall in cash and Jewellery, the assessee offered additional business income of Rs.70.60 Lacs. Except ... business income and agricultural income, the assessee is not shown to have any other substantial sources of income. Upon these facts, it could very well be said that a plausible view was taken by Ld. AO in the matter with due application of mind. The same could not be said

Palaniappan Ramanathan, Namakkal vs. ACIT, CC-3, Coimbatore

The appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 1293/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1293/Chny/2024 (िनधा*रणवष* / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Palaniappan Ramanathan Ito बनाम/ 130-B, Near Vesumani Bunk Central Circle-3 Vs. Salem Road, Namakkal – 637 001 Coimbatore "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Ahopr-4556-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkataraman (Ca)- Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Nilay Baran Som (Cit) -Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri T.S.Lakshmi Venkataraman (CA)- Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT) -Ld. DR
Section 131Section 132Section 133ASection 153ASection 28Section 69

assessee offered additional income of Rs.10.82 Lacs and the remaining amount of Rs.52.48 Lacs was stated to be sourced out of opening cash balance, agricultural income, earlier loans realized and gifts from family members. The assessee furnished cash flow statement which was rejected and Ld. AO added the amount ... Rs.11.50 Lacs were further advanced during this year. The Ld. CIT(A) granted relief of Rs.5 Lacs in this regard. In support of agricultural income and gift from parents in AYs starting from AYs 2013-14 to 2018-19, the assessee had furnished before Ld. AO proof of ownership