2021 (3) TMI 462 - AT - Income Tax

Nature of land sold - CIT(A) upholding the finding of A.O. that the agricultural land sold by the assessee is a capital asset within the meaning of Section 2(14)(iii) - claim of appellant that the land sold was ancestral - During the course of hearing assessee has filed additional evidence with regard to distance to distance of land sold from the municipal area and the affidavit of the assessee affirming the fact that the agricultural land is situated beyond 8 KM of local limit of Jaipur municipality on Sikar Road - HELD THAT - Considering the certificate of Sub-Tehsildar mentioning the fact that village Burthal, khata Nos. 824, 825, 831, 832, 833, 834, 824/1263, 834/1266 and 853, in the year 1994, are situated at 9 KM of gram Nindar as well as affidavit filed by the assessee mentioning that fact that the road distance of the village Bhurthal i.e. area in which land is situated in nearly 10.9 KMs from the local limit of Jaipur municipality on Sikar Road i.e. Nindar Mod as was existing on 06/01/1994 i.e. date of publication of notification No. 9447 in the official gazette. We admit the documents placed on record by the assessee as additional evidences. Once, we have admitted the additional evidence, therefore, the matter is remanded back to the A.O. for the deciding the issue afresh after verifying the documents so placed before us as additional evidences. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of agricultural land as a capital asset under Section 2(14)(iii) of the IT Act, 1961.
2. Validity of additional evidence submitted by the assessee regarding the distance of the land from the local limits of Jaipur municipality.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appeal was filed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the A.O.'s finding that the agricultural land sold by the assessee is a capital asset under Section 2(14)(iii) of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the land was ancestral, but the Ld. CIT(A) found discrepancies in the purchase date provided by the assessee. The ITAT considered the arguments and additional evidence submitted by the assessee, including a certificate from Sub-Tehsildar and an affidavit affirming the distance of the land from Jaipur municipality. After examination, the ITAT admitted the additional evidence, remanding the matter back to the A.O. for fresh consideration based on the new documents. Consequently, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

Issue 2:
During the hearing, the assessee submitted additional evidence related to the distance of the land from the local limits of Jaipur municipality. The Ld. DR opposed the admission of this evidence, claiming it lacked evidentiary value. However, the ITAT carefully evaluated the additional evidence, which included a certificate from Sub-Tehsildar and an affidavit from the assessee. The ITAT found the documents to be relevant and admitted them as additional evidence. This decision led to the matter being remanded back to the A.O. for fresh consideration, ultimately resulting in the allowance of the appeal for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the ITAT's judgment allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of considering additional evidence in tax matters and ensuring a thorough examination of all relevant documents before making a final decision.