9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1543 - AT - Income TaxNature of land sold - Long term capital gain - capital asset or agricultural land - Held that - From sale of the impugned agriculture land situated at village Rau (M.P) long term capital gain was computed by the assessee. Through out the proceedings before the lower authorities and before us that the impugned agriculture land is not a capital asset and is not liable to be taxed as per the Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.94. The agriculture land situated at Rau being 1.5 to 2 km away from A.B Road is not to be treated as capital asset. The impugned land sold by the assessee was an agriculture land used for agricultural operations and was not covered under the definition of capital asset as provided in section 2(14)(iii) of the Act read with Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.1994. Therefore no interference is called for in the findings of Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed.
Issues:
1. Assessment of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of agriculture land. 2. Deletion of addition of Long Term Capital Gain by Ld.CIT(A). 3. Interpretation of Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.94. 4. Compliance with principles of natural justice in tax assessment. Analysis: 1. Assessment of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of agriculture land: The case involved an individual engaged in civil construction, declaring income under section 44AD of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had sold land but not disclosed the transaction treating it as agricultural land exempt from capital gains tax. The AO calculated Long Term Capital Gain and assessed additional income. The assessee appealed against this assessment. 2. Deletion of addition of Long Term Capital Gain by Ld.CIT(A): The Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition of Long Term Capital Gain, holding that the impugned land did not constitute a capital asset as per section 2(14)(iii) and Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.94. The assessee argued that the land was outside the definition of capital asset and therefore exempt from tax. The Ld.CIT(A) agreed, leading to the deletion of the addition. 3. Interpretation of Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.94: The Notification specified areas not classified as capital assets, including Rau. The Ld.CIT(A) referenced this Notification and reports from the Patwari of Rau to support the decision that the land in question was not a capital asset. The Tribunal upheld this interpretation, emphasizing that the land did not fall within the specified limits outlined in the Notification. 4. Compliance with principles of natural justice in tax assessment: The Revenue raised concerns regarding the deletion of the addition without giving the AO an opportunity to respond, alleging a violation of natural justice principles. However, the Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, highlighting the evidence presented and the lack of contradiction in the facts provided by the assessee and the Patwari of Rau. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objection. The decision was based on the interpretation of the law, specifically the definition of capital assets and the applicability of Notification No.9447 dated 6.1.94. The judgment emphasized the importance of factual evidence and compliance with legal provisions in tax assessments.
|
