9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l operation. Except adangal, there was no evidence bought on record that the assessee carried agricultural operations. The adangal filed by the assessee shows that there were few coconut trees. Simply because, there are coconut trees, it does not mean that the assessee carried agricultural operation, particularly, when the assessee has not reported any agricultural income. Apart from that, the said extent of land was just adjacent to the sea not useful for any agricultural purposes, whereas, the assessee s statement is that he has carried agricultural operation. To carry agricultural operation water is very much required and sea water is not useful for carrying any agricultural activities or to raise any agricultural crop - we are of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le consideration was ₹.3,70,00,000/-. After adjusting the indexed cost of acquisition and improvement, brokerage and expenses in connection with sale, the long term capital gain was computed to be ₹.3,58,24,032/-. The assessee had invested the long term capital gain relating to section 54B of the Act to the extent of ₹.2.43 crores in capital gains account scheme and ₹.1.20 crores was paid to his father Shri Srinath Rajam to acquire agricultural land at Burliar Village, Coonoor. Accordingly, the taxable long term capital gain was brought to NIL. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed by disallowing the deduction claimed under section 54B of the Act amounting to ₹.3,08,24,032/-. Durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the decision in the case of PCIT v. A. Lalichan (supra), the Assessing Officer has concluded that the property sold by the assessee is not an agricultural land and no agricultural activity was carried on the said land and disallowed the claim of deduction under section 54B of the Act of ₹.3,08,24,032/-. On appeal, by considering various case law of various Courts, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee had used the land only for agricultural purposes based on the adangal and other documents produced. By strongly relying upon the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arry agricultural operation except, adangal, there is no evidence to show that the assessee carried agricultural operation and denied the claim of deduction under section 54B of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) decided the issue in favour of the assessee. On further appeal by the Revenue before the ITAT, vide order in ITA No. 1758/Mds/2017 dated 28.12.2017, the Tribunal has directed the Assessing Officer to re-examine the matter in the light of the material that may be produced by the assessee more particularly the adangal extract and other relevant documents and decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. 8. In the second round of litigation, when the Assessing Officer has called for the details, except stating that the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
