2022 (1) TMI 964 - AT - Income Tax

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - capital gain resulted from transfer of agricultural land - Assessee is against not providing opportunity to the assessee as against validity of the proceedings - HELD THAT - The assessee has not brought any material in support of his averments. Therefore these grounds of the assessee s appeal are dismissed. Deduction u/s 54 - Issue whether the land was an agricultural land and did not fall within the definition of capital asset was not adverted and adjudicated. Therefore under these facts the impugned order is hereby set aside and the issue whether the land as transferred fall within the definition of capital asset u/s 2 (14) of the Act. If yes whether the assessee was entitled for any deduction u/s 54 of the Act. The A.O is therefore directed to decide these issues after presiding adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ground allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Opportunity to present the case.
2. Validity of reassessment proceedings.
3. Taxability of capital gains from agricultural land.
4. Levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Opportunity to present the case:
The appellant contended that the order was passed without providing a proper and reasonable opportunity to present its case, violating the principles of audi alteram partem. The Tribunal noted that the appellant and its representatives failed to attend multiple hearings, and the notice sent through speed post was returned unserved. Thus, the Tribunal dismissed this ground, stating that the appellant did not bring any material in support of its averments.

2. Validity of reassessment proceedings:
The appellant challenged the initiation and validity of the reassessment proceedings on various grounds, including non-compliance with statutory conditions, invalid reasons for issuing the notice under Section 148, and the proceedings being barred by limitation. The Tribunal found that the appellant did not provide any supporting material for these claims. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed grounds 1 to 10, which pertained to the validity of the reassessment proceedings.

3. Taxability of capital gains from agricultural land:
The appellant argued that the gain from the transfer of agricultural land was not liable to be taxed under Section 45 of the Income Tax Act, as the land did not fall within the definition of a capital asset under Section 2(14). The Tribunal observed that the lower authorities did not adequately examine whether the land was a capital asset. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed the Assessing Officer to decide whether the land transferred fell within the definition of a capital asset under Section 2(14) and if the appellant was entitled to any deduction under Section 54. The Tribunal allowed grounds 11 to 14 for statistical purposes.

4. Levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B:
The appellant contested the levying of interest under Sections 234A and 234B. The Tribunal held this ground to be consequential in nature and stated that it needed no separate adjudication.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded by setting aside the impugned order regarding the taxability of capital gains from agricultural land and directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the issue after providing adequate opportunity to the appellant. The other grounds raised by the appellant were dismissed due to a lack of supporting evidence. The decision was pronounced on 12th January 2022.