Case LawHigh Court › Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v....

Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. K.shanthi

High Court 15 Oct 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. K.shanthi
Date of order
15 Oct 2024
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax v. K.shanthi, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the lands purchased by assessee were agricultural lands ignoring the fact that the lands purchased were barren lands and assessee had not carried out any agricultural activity subsequent to its purchase?" 2.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.10.2024 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMARAND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN T.C.A.No.784 of 2018 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 163, Race Course RoadCoimbatore...Appellant Vs. K.Shanthi..Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Madras “D” Bench dated 02.02.2018 passed in I.T.A.No.433/Mds/2017. For the Appellant:Mr.Karthik RanganathanSenior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Order of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)The present tax case appeal was admitted on 18.12.2018 by this Court on the following substantial questions of law:- "1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the land sold by the assessee was an agricultural land ignoring the fact that the land sold was barren land and the Village Administrative Officer had certified that no agricultural activity was carried out from 2002-03 onwards? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the lands purchased by assessee were agricultural lands ignoring the fact that the lands purchased were barren lands and assessee had not carried out any agricultural activity subsequent to its purchase?" 2. It is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant Revenue that this matter is covered under the Low Tax Effect as per the recent Circular dated 17.09.2024, in Circular No.9/2024. 3. Hence, this appeal stands dismissed, as covered under the low tax effect and the substantial questions of law arising in this appeal are kept open to be decided at the later point of time. There shall be no order as to costs. (R.S.K., J.) (C.S.N, J) 15.10.2024 Neutral Citation:Yes/No drm T.C.A.No.784 of 2018 R. SURESH KUMAR, J.ANDC. SARAVANAN, J. (drm) T.C.A.No.784 of 2018 15.10.2024
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan