9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l asset. At no point of time the assessee had disputed that the land in question did not fall within the area of 5 kms from municipal limits of Sangrur - CIT(A) has also mentioned that the land is situated within 5 kms of Sangrur Municipal Committee - Section 2(14)(iii)(b) makes it clear that areas upto distance of 5 kms from municipal limits of Sangrur in all directions falls within the local limits of Sangrur municipality - there was no denial of the fact that the land falls within 5 kms of Sangrur Municipal Committee, CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal fell into error while ordering the deletion – Decided in favour of Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 339 of 2007 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 20-2-2014 - Ajay Kumar Mittal And Anita Chaudhry,JJ. For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sangrur would itself not constitute a capital asset within the meaning of Section 2(14(iii)(b) unless village Mangwal falls within the jurisdiction of municipality of Sangrur whereas Section 2(14) (iii)(b) does not impose any such requirement? 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assesseerespondent purchased land in question at village Mangwal during financial year 2000-01 for a consideration of Rs.21,40,000/- and sold the same on 12.12.2001 for a sum of Rs.34,23,932/-. He did not show any income while filing the return for the assessment year 2002-03. The Assessing Officer, vide order dated 25.11.2003 held that the land sold by the assessee falls within the definition of capital asset as provided under Section 2(14) of the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Punjab at Sr. No. 18 of said notification. Thus land being within the 5 kms from the jurisdiction of Municipality of Sangrur would itself not constitute an asset within the meaning of section 2(14)(iii)(b) unless village Mangwal falls within the jurisdiction of Municipality of Sangrur also like village Nangal Dewat falls within the jurisdiction of Municipal Corporation of Delhi. Undisputedly village Mangwal is not within the jurisdiction of Municipality of Sangrur. Hence, the land in question is not a land to constitute an asset within the meaning of section 2(14)(iii)(a) or (b) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Hence, the Assessing Officer is directed to treat the said land not an asset within the meaning of section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the I.T. Act, 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is clear that if the agricultural land is situated outside the jurisdiction of a municipality, then no tax on any profits or gains arising from the transfer of such land will be chargeable under the head capital gains . However, under clause (b) any area within 8 kms from the local limits of any Municipality or Cantonment referred in Clause (a) or within such area as the Central Government may specify by way of a notification having regard to the extent and scope of urbanisation of that area would be within the ambit of capital asset. 8. In the case in hand, it is evident that at no point of time the assessee had disputed that the land in question did not fall within the area of 5 kms from municipal limits of Sangrur. Even CIT(A) has al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
