9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee has submitted the necessary documentation issued by the Competent authorities that the agriculture land at Village Raipur Khurd was not situated within the jurisdiction of municipality of Mohali as per Government notification dated 28/01/2014 and secondly, the assessee has also submitted that the population of Village Raipur Khurd was 907 persons as per latest published Census of Punjab 2011 which is less than the prescribed threshold of 10000 persons as so provided in the statue. We thus find that both the conditions are cumulatively satisfied in the instant and the agriculture land so sold qualify for exclusion and cannot be classified as capital asset in terms of section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Act. As given that population of Village Raipur Khurd was 907 as per latest census, even as per section 2(14)(iii)(b), one of the essential conditions of population exceeding the threshold is not satisfied and the subject agriculture land will stand excluded and cannot be classified as capital asset. In light of the same, long term capital gains on sale of the agriculture land, being not a capital asset cannot be brought to tax and the addition so made is hereby directed to be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n municipal limits of Mohali and as such was Capital Asset u/s 2(14) of the Act and liable to be taxed. Subsequent to the sale of land, the assessee purchased 4 pieces of agricultural land in his name his wife's name, as per details given below: S.No Document submitted/Sale deed Location of agriculture land Area of la Type of land Sale consideration (Rs.) Purchase (assessee's Share )(Rs.) 1 20.06.2014 Raipur khurd, khasra No. 927 4bighas 16 biswa Agriculture 1,0128000/-(with stamp duty 50,64,000/- (50% share) 2. 11.08.2014 Kartarpur HB No. 156 2 kanal 17 marla Agriculture 32,41800/- (with stamp duty) 32,41,800/- (full share) 3 08.04.2015 NalinaKhurd HB No. 297 32 kanal Agriculture 49,9200/-(with stamp duty) In wife's name 4. 08.04.2015 Kartarpur HB No. 156 48 bigha Agriculture 1,44,58,500/- (with stamp duty) 72,29,250/- (50% share) 3.1 The assessee claimed deduction u/s 54B of the Act in respect of sale consideration invested by him for further purchase of land. The AO gave the benefit of deduction u/s 54B of Rs. 83,05,800/- in respect of agricultural land purchased by assessee in his own name. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee could not furnish documentar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the benefit of the section to an assessee who purchases land even in the name of third person. The case related to claims of exemption based on purchase of agricultural land purchased in the name of his wife. The court specified that the new asset had to be in the name of assessee himself. 4.2 The ld CIT(A) further held that having made claims u/s 54B during the course of assessment proceedings(that was duly adjudicated by the AO and credit given for land purchased in his own name), the assessee, during the appellate proceedings clearly has adopted another tack. He is attempting to canvass, alternately, that the land sold was agricultural land and therefore income on its sale was not taxable. He furnished certificate from Patwari, Village -Raipur Khurd, in which it is certified that the agricultural land sold by the assessee was used for agricultural purposes the said land is outside the jurisdiction of municipal committee. The said report does not certify that the land in question was being used for agricultural purposes in the two years immediately preceding the date of transfer, which is a prerequisite condition for claiming deduction u/s 54B of the Act. In any case this aspec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has sold rural agricultural Land at Vill Raipur Khurd alongwith other co-owners for Rs. 5,92,88,000/- on 14.05.2014. The share of the Assessee was 7/18 i.e Rs. 2,30,56,445/-. The AO held that the land in question was within the municipal limits of Mohali and thus the land was capital assets as per provisions of sec 2(14) of the Act and liable to capital gains. The AO gave the benefit of purchase of agricultural land in the name of the Assessee as per the provisions of sec 54B of the Act. 6.1 It was submitted that the Land sold by the Assessee was not a capital Asset and was purely in the nature of Rural Agriculture Land as per Section 2(14)(iii) of the Income Tax Act 1961. It was submitted that as per the definition of agriculture land, it is clear that any Land which is outside the Municipal Limits and has population of less than 10000, the said land would be agricultural land and not covered by the provisions of sec 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Act. 6.2. It was submitted that the Assessee has filed the following documents before the department in order to prove the same: a) Verifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Khasra number and without showing how the distance of the land was measured could not be accepted. c) CIT vs Dr. R. Rangarajan in Appeal No. 410/Mds/2015 dated 03.08.2016 (Madras HC) CIT vs Smt Sakunthala Rangarajan in Appeal No.411/Mds/2015 order dated 27.07.2017 (Madras HC): 31. On the facts and circumstances of this case, we also wish to state that in the matter giving weightage to the evidence, report of the departmental inspection vis-a-vis certificates of the Village Administrative Officer, Deputy Surveyor, Ambattur Taluk and General Manager, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Ltd's, for the purpose of Section 2(14)(iii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, certificates of the Revenue Authorities and Public Transport Corporation Ltd., on the measurement of distance, by the approach road, should be given weightage and accepted, unless the contrary is proved. 6.7 It was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has stated that, the certificates as filed by the Assessee does not conforms to the definition of agricultural land as per the provisions of I T Act. Further he has stated that the AO on the basis of the maps has come to the conclusion that the Land is capital asset. In this re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities below. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. Firstly, we find that there is no restriction in assessee pleading before the ld CIT(A) by way of an alternate ground that the land sold being an agriculture land falls outside the definition of a capital asset u/s 2(14)(iii) of the Act and the sale proceeds arising from the sale thereof cannot be brought to tax. The same being a legal ground and infact emerging from the findings of the AO where the AO has held that even though the land is an agricultural land, the same falls within the municipal limits of Mohali and thus exigible to tax. 9. It is the submission of the assessee that the agricultural land sold by the assessee was outside the Municipal Limit of Mohali during F.Y. 2014-15 and secondly, the population of the village was only 907 persons and thus, the agriculture land so sold doesn t qualify as capital asset and cannot be brought to tax. In support of his contentions, the assessee furnished certificates of Patwari- Vill. Raipur Khurd, attested by Tehsildar, Sarpach Namberdar of Village- Raipur Khurd, a certificate of Town Planner, Municipal Corporation, SAS Nagar and copy o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n if one is not fulfilled or is not present, it would be an agricultural land which would not be included within and treated as capital asset. 12. In the instant case, the assessee has submitted the necessary documentation issued by the Competent authorities that the agriculture land at Village Raipur Khurd was not situated within the jurisdiction of municipality of Mohali as per Government notification dated 28/01/2014 and secondly, the assessee has also submitted that the population of Village Raipur Khurd was 907 persons as per latest published Census of Punjab 2011 which is less than the prescribed threshold of 10000 persons as so provided in the statue. We thus find that both the conditions are cumulatively satisfied in the instant and the agriculture land so sold qualify for exclusion and cannot be classified as capital asset in terms of section 2(14)(iii)(a) of the Act. Further, given that population of Village Raipur Khurd was 907 as per latest census, even as per section 2(14)(iii)(b), one of the essential conditions of population exceeding the threshold is not satisfied and the subject agriculture land will stand excluded and cannot be classified as capital asset. In ligh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
