Commissioner of Income Tax V. K. Visweswara Reddy

RC/2/2004

AI Insights

The case involved a reference from the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, to the High Court concerning the taxability of capital gains on the sale of agricultural lands under Section 45 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal sought clarification on two legal questions: whether the gains from the sale of lands were liable to capital gains tax under Section 45, and whether the inclusion of agricultural lands within the definition of a capital asset in Section 2(14) of the Act does not automatically bring a charge for levy of tax under Section 45. However, the High Court did not address these questions due to the monetary threshold for tax appeals not being met, as per the circulars issued by the Income Tax Department.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 699026 (HC-TELANGANA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Indian Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: J V PRASAD
• Keywords: Agricultural lands; Capital gains tax; Income Tax; Legal Reference
• Section: 2(14); 45; 256(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK Between: Commissioner of lncome Tax, A.P. ll, Hyderabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1. K. Visweswara Reddy, Hyderabad 2. K. Sujatha Devi, Hyderabad. 3. K. Anita Reddy, Hyderabad. 4. K. Jayalatha, Hyderabad. ..,RESPONDENTS Case referred to the High Court by the lncome -Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad Bench \"A\" Hyderabad, under Section 256 (1) ofthe lndian lncome Tax Act, 1 961 in R. A. Nos. 367 I Hydl 1986 ( in ITA No. 1055 / Hyd/ 1984 ) ; R.A. No. 368 / Hyd/ 1986 (in l.T.A. No. 1056 / Hyd/ 1984 ); R.A.No.370 / Hyd / 1986 (in l.T.A.No. 1058 / Hyd / 1984); R.A. No.371 lHydl 1986 ( in ITA No. 1059 / Hyd/ '1984) Assessment Year, 1981 -82, on its file for,decision on the following question of law viz., \" (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal ought to have held that , alternatively, the gains on the sale of lands are liable to capital gains tax under Section 45? I I i I RC NO: 2OF 2004 l (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holdinq that the inclusion of agricultural lands within the definition of a car:ital asset in section 2 (14) of the l.T. Act does not bring a charge for levy of tax u/s. 45 of the LT.Act ?'. The reference coning on for hearing upon perusing the letter of reference of the lncome-Tax-Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench \"A\" Hyderabad dated 31-12- 2003 and records in rhe case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. J.V. Prasad, Senior Counsel for lncome Tax Department appearing on behalf of the applicant The Court delivered the followinq order I 1 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK RC. No. 2 ot 2OO4 ORDER:1per ttort'ble Si Justice T.Vinod Kunrur) Sri J.V.Prasad, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that since the tax effect in the appeal is below the monetary limit prescribed by the Circular No.3 of 2018, dt.11.07.2018 as amended by Circular No.17 of 2019, dt.08.08.2019, there is no need for this Court to answer the present reference made by the Tribunal as the same would be purely academic. 2. In view ofthe same, this RC is closed. No order as to costs 3. Consequently, miscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed in the light of this {ina-l order. //TRUE COPY// SdIB.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT R,EGISTRAR $s SECTIbN OFFICER To, J I. The Regiitrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench \"A\" Hyderabad 2. One CC to Sri J.V. Prasad, Senior Standing Counsel for lncome tax Department (OPUC) 3. Two CD Copies. HIGH COURT DATED:2311112022 ORDER RC.No.2 of 201)4 CLOSING THE R[FERRED CASE . WITHOUT COSTS t(. HE STA 't -( lj, a- J o O 2g t[N EN .:. ,:/ .)/ a', i :1. t,i T .v 5 I : I I "