Which cases are most cited on Section 2(14)(iii)(a)?

CIT v. Ashok Kumar Rathi (404 ITR 173) — 15 citing judgments; Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle (34 Taxmann.com 286) — 7 citing judgments; Commissioner of Income-tax-3 v. Anthony John Pereira\n (425 ITR 134) — 5 citing judgments; PCIT v. M/s. K.P.R. Developers Ltd. (311 CTR 832) — 3 citing judgments.

How many judgments are there on Section 2(14)(iii)(a)?

BharatTax indexes 70 ITAT, High Court and Supreme Court judgments that turn on Section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Income Tax Act

Q: What is the leading case on Section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Income Tax Act?

CIT v. Ashok Kumar Rathi (404 ITR 173) is the decision most relied on for Section 2(14)(iii)(a), cited in 15 judgments. If land is recorded as agricultural land in revenue records, it is considered agricultural land for tax purposes, entitling the assessee to exemption from tax.

The decision most relied on for Section 2(14)(iii)(a) is CIT v. Ashok Kumar Rathi (404 ITR 173), cited in 15 of the 70 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 2(14)(iii)(a)

CIT v. Ashok Kumar Rathi

404 ITR 173 · 2018 · High Court

citing judgments

If land is recorded as agricultural land in revenue records, it is considered agricultural land for tax purposes, entitling the assessee to exemption from tax.

Trib.) 6. Smt. (Dr.) Subha Tripathi v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle

34 Taxmann.com 286 · 2013 · ITAT

citing judgments

Commissioner of Income-tax-3 v. Anthony John Pereira\n

425 ITR 134 · 2020 · High Court

citing judgments

PCIT v. M/s. K.P.R. Developers Ltd.

311 CTR 832 · 2019 · High Court

citing judgments

Judgments on Section 2(14)(iii)(a)

Shri Ambaben Jamubhai Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2681/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) िनधा"रणवष"/ S.N. आ.अ.सं./ अपीलाथ"/Appellant Vs ""थ"/Respondent Ay:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

Hiteshbhai Dahyabhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2381/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) िनधा"रणवष"/ S.N. आ.अ.सं./ अपीलाथ"/Appellant Vs ""थ"/Respondent Ay:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

Smt. Ambaben Narottambhai Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), New Ward- ITO, Ward-1(3)(6), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1665/AHD/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Apr 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) िनधा"रणवष"/ S.N. आ.अ.सं./ अपीलाथ"/Appellant Vs ""थ"/Respondent Ay:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

Champaben Amrutlal Patel, Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4), New Jurisdiction ITO, Ward-2(1)(4), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 1329/AHD/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Hearing In Virtual Court) िनधा"रणवष"/ S.N. आ.अ.सं./ अपीलाथ"/Appellant Vs ""थ"/Respondent Ay:

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

ITO, New Delhi vs. Smt Savitri Gupta, New Delhi

ITA 5581/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 133(6)Section 2Section 2(14)(iii)

Smt. Birma Devi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

ITA 678/JPR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (CIT-DR)

Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

Mahendra L Shah (HUF), Mumbai vs. ITO 21(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4382/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri. R.K. SinhaFor Respondent: Shri. Kailash Kanojiya

Section 2Section 2(14)Section 271

ACIT, Salem vs. R.Mahadevan, Salem

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 3393/CHNY/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamony

Girdharilal K . Agarawal, Mumbai vs. DCIT 12(3), Mumbai

Accordingly appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3828/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sandeep Gosainassessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Girdharilal K. Agrawal, Dy. Commissioner Of Income- 302 Vikas, Tax, 12(3), Room No.658, 6Th Floor, 11 Bank Street, Vs. Fort, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai – 400 001 M.K. Road, Pan: Aabpa 1257E Mumbai – 400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Maurya Pratap, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 21.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.12.2015 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Maurya Pratap, D.R

Section 143(3)

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Khazan Singh

ITA/339/2007HC Punjab & Haryana20 Feb 2014

Section 2Section 2(14)Section 2(14)(iii)