9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 186X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the power of attorney holder of the assessee. The assessee raised this plea before the learned CIT (A). In the remand proceedings, the learned Assessing Officer had written a letter to this concern and sought its explanation. The letter was returned back with the Postal Departmental remark “no such office on this address”. Thus the Assessing Officer did not accept the contention of the assessee. The assessee has sought to file copy of the cheque which was received from this concern. On an analysis of the evidence produced before us, we are of the view that it is to be investigated as to why this concern has paid this much of amount to the assessee. A complete investigation is required on this issue. - Decided in favour of assessee for statical purposes. - ITA No.271/Bang/2013 - - - Dated:- 25-7-2014 - Shri Rajpal Yadav And Shri Jason P. Boaz, JJ. For The Appellant : Shri Deepak Padmanabhan,CA For The Respondent : Shri L.V.Bhaskar Reddy,(DR) ORDER Per Rajpal Yadav, J.M. The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the learned CIT (A), dated 04.09.2012, passed for assessment year 2008-09. Though the assessee has taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4B of the Act. 5. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee had received a compensation of ₹ 14,62,500/-, whereas she had made investment of ₹ 47,17,695/-. The assessee failed to give explanation of ₹ 32,55,195/-. Thus according to the Assessing Officer the assessee is unable to disclose the source of the investment. Accordingly he made an addition of ₹ 32,55,195 which is the difference between the ultimate investments made by the assessee in the two properties, minus the compensation received by the assessee. Appeal to the CIT (A) did not bring any relief to the assessee. 6. Before us the assessee filed an application for permission to lead additional evidence. She sought to place on record copies of the Revenue record and copies of a cheque received from M/s Exora Business Park (P) Ltd. She also intended to place on record a certificate from the Gramothan Resource Centre indicating that the wild grass standing in the land of the assessee acquired by the KIADB is an agricultural product, which is to be used for the purpose of cattle feed in and around Bangalore. The assessee filed her affidavit in support of her application. 7. The l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ransfer of land used for agricultural purpose not to be charged in certain cases. Under sub-section (1), it has been provided that subject to the provisions of sub section 2 where the capital gain arises from the transfer of a capital asset being land which, in the two years immediately preceding the date on which the transfer took place, was being used by the assessee or a parent of his for agricultural purposes and the assessee has, within a period of two years after that date, purchased any other land for being used for agricultural purposes, then the capital gain being charged to income tax as income of the previous year in which the transfer took place, it will be governed under sub-clause I II and Subsection 2 of section 54B. Since the meaning of other provisions are not in dispute or not relevant for the controversy in hand, therefore, it is not necessary to take note of the other clauses. The dispute before us is, whether the land which was acquired by the KIADB was used by the assessee immediately preceding two years before its acquisition for agricultural purpose or not? And she has purchased agricultural land within two years. If it was used for agricultural purpose, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the owner meant or intended to use it for agricultural purposes ? (h) Whether the land was situate in a developed area? Whether its physical characteristics, surrounding situation and use of the lands in the adjoining area were such as would indicate that the land was agricultural ? (i) Whether the land itself was developed by plotting and providing roads and other facilities ? (j) Whether there were any previous sales of portions of the land for non-agricultural use ? (k) Whether permission under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, was obtained because the sale or intended sale was in favour of a non-agriculturist? If so, whether the sale or intended sale to such non-agriculturist was for nonagricultural or agricultural user ? (l) Whether the land was sold on yardage or on acreage basis ? (m) Whether an agriculturist would purchase the land for agricultural purposes at the price at which the land was sold and whether the owner would have ever sold the land valuing it as a property yielding agricultural produce on the basis of its yield? Thus, we find that the issue was not examined properly. The learned Assessing Officer o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
