“Section 2(14)(3)”

ABDUL AZIZ,DUDU vs. ITO WARD 7(3), LAL KOTHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

gains, in order to substantiate that the agricultural land sold by\nhim did not fall in the definition of capital asset as per section 2(14)(3).The above evidence is\nclarificatory in nature. Courts have held that clarificatory nature of materials is not additional\nevidence. This issue arose before