9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of agricultural lands as business income – Decided in favour of assessee. Claim of deduction u/s 80IB(11A) - Information/evidence furnished at the time of finalization of assessment or not – Held that:- In assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment year, it has been held that the assessee has fulfilled all the conditions, therefore, entitled for deduction u/s 80IB(11A) – thus, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld - Decided against revenue. STCG and LTCG disallowed - Information/evidence furnished or not – Held that:- CIT(A) rightly noticed that in the remand report, the AO has accepted the interest income at ₹ 83,721/- as shown by the assessee - Thus, the addition made on estimate basis of at ₹ 1,00,000/- is deleted - Regarding the short term capital gains shown at ₹ 2,06,826/- which was estimated by the A.O. at ₹ 2,50,000/- is again accepted by the AO in the remand report and the sale of land at ₹ 1,47,441/- which was estimated at ₹ 1,50,000/- the AO has accepted the figure in the remand report, therefore, the addition made at ₹ 4,00,000/- on account of short term capital gains and ₹ 1,00,000/- income from other sources is de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etions made by Ld. CIT(A). 5. The issue raised by assessee was that sale proceeds of ₹ 14,09,959 from sale of agricultural land is exempt under section 2(14)(iii). This issue is covered by the Coordinate Bench decision in the case of assessee in earlier year. The Coordinate Bench vide sub-para 13.3 in page 55 of the order held as under: 13.3. We have considered both the parties and perused the material on record. The assessee purchased the above lands, used it for agricultural activities for about 2 years and thereafter sold it for profits. The agricultural income earned from these lands were shown in the returns of income field, which have not been disputed by the A.O. Purchase and sale price of the above lands also shown that the same were transacted as agricultural lands, only otherwise, the price would have been abnormally high. A.O. has not brought any evidence on record to prove that the above lands were purchased and used for any other purpose by the subsequent buyers. The purchase and sale deed of the said lands as well as the land revenue records referred the said lands as agricultural lands. Considering all these facts and circumstances of the case, we are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the A.O. in the absence of information/evidence towards the head long term capital gains of ₹ 3,10.743. 6. The CIT(A)-VI is erred in not appreciating the disallowance made by the A.O. in the absence of information/evidence towards the head income from other sources of ₹ 1,00,000. 9. We are unable to appreciate the grounds raised by Revenue for the simple reason that most of the issues have been accepted by A.O. in the remand report. In spite of giving a remand report to Ld. CIT(A) A.O. has come in appeal contesting that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have called for remand report from A.O. to verify the issues. As per the evidence placed on record, the Ld. CIT(A) called for remand report vide letter dated 22.06.2011 and A.O. gave report on 05.09.2011. Ld. CIT(A) also gave an opportunity to assessee vide letter dated 09.09.2011. In view of these facts, ground No.2 itself is perverse and the same is rejected. 10. As far as ground No.3 is concerned, this issue is covered in favour of assessee by the orders of ITAT which the Ld. CIT(A) followed. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is as under : 2.3. I have considered the submissions of the appellant, order of the A.O. and facts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : 3.3. I have considered submissions of the appellant, order of the A.O. and facts of the case carefully, it is noticed that this issue of long term capital gains is not discussed by the A.O. in the assessment order anywhere but made the addition in the computation of income. However, in the remand report the A.O. has submitted as under :- As regard income from long term capital gains, it is submitted that it is typographical error. In this regard; it is pertinent to refer to the questionnaire issued by the A. O. vide dated 05. 11.2009 which is as under :- Question No. 2(ii): You have shown gross receipts of business at ₹ 52,16,787/- and have claimed expenses under various heads. However, as no verification of expenses claimed is possible, your income from business is proposed to be taken @ 8% of gross receipts shown. Thus, your income from business is proposed to be taken at ₹ 41,17,343/- . However, while finalizing the assessment, the A.O. instead of treating the same as income from business mentioned as 'income from LTCG'. In the remand report the A.O. has mentioned that while typing income from business, it was mentioned as income from lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
