Tribunal rules land not a capital asset in '79 acquisition, upholds CIT(A)'s decision

Income-Tax Officer. Versus Prajapati Shankarbhai Ramabhai.

Income-Tax Officer. Versus Prajapati Shankarbhai Ramabhai. - TTJ 100, 143, [2006] 6 SOT 487 (AHD.) Issues Involved:

1. Whether the acquisition of agricultural land is considered a capital asset.
2. Determination of the date of transfer for the purpose of capital gains.
3. Applicability of Section 45(5) of the IT Act regarding enhanced compensation.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether the acquisition of agricultural land is considered a capital asset:

The core issue is whether the agricultural land acquired by AUDA is a capital asset under Section 2(14) of the IT Act. The AO argued that the land is a capital asset as it falls within 3 km of Kalol Municipality, invoking Section 2(14)(iii) and Section 45. The CIT(A) countered this, stating that at the time of acquisition on 15th Nov., 1979, the land was not a capital asset since Kalol was not a municipality then. The Tribunal upheld CIT(A)'s view, noting that the notification including Kalol under Section 2(14)(iii) became effective only from 6th Jan., 1994, long after the acquisition date.

2. Determination of the date of transfer for the purpose of capital gains:

The AO contended that the transfer date is when the compensation was finalized on 31st Aug., 1994, making it liable for capital gains tax in the assessment year 1996-97. The CIT(A) and Tribunal disagreed, stating the transfer occurred on 23rd Sept., 1986, when the award was given. The Tribunal emphasized that the land was not a capital asset on this date as the notification under Section 2(14)(iii) was not yet in effect.

3. Applicability of Section 45(5) of the IT Act regarding enhanced compensation:

The AO applied Section 45(5), arguing that the enhanced compensation received should be taxed as capital gains. The Tribunal clarified that Section 45(5) applies only if the original transaction is subject to capital gains tax. Since the land was not a capital asset at the time of the original transfer, Section 45(5) does not apply. The enhanced compensation received on 31st Aug., 1994, is not subject to capital gains as the original transaction was not taxable.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal confirmed that the acquisition of agricultural land by AUDA in 1979 did not make it a capital asset as per the IT Act definitions effective at that time. The transfer date was established as 23rd Sept., 1986, when the award was given, not when the compensation was enhanced. Consequently, Section 45(5) does not apply, and the CIT(A)'s deletion of the capital gains addition was upheld. The appeals by the Revenue were dismissed.