Why is Land not considered as a fixed capital? As far as I know 'Fixed Capital' includes things which don't deteriorate or get used up upto a long, e.g. tools, machinery and building etc. My question is that since Land fulfills this criteria, why is it not considered as a Fixed Capital?
The distinction between land and physical capital is based on some of their economic properties, particularly relating to investment: whether it can be reproduced or not; whether it has a finite lifetime (compared to the human lifetime).

Almost all land is not reproducible, and does not have a finite lifetime.

Physical capital is reproducible, and does have a finite lifetime.

Hence, almost all land is not physical capital.

There are corner cases, where land is reproducible, and may appear and then disappear again in less than a handful of human lifetimes: in those very rare cases, that particular land behaves more like physical capital rather than how land generally behaves, and so could be classed as such.