TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (11) TMI 583
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n ITA No. 547/CHANDI/2003, relating to the assessment year 1998-99. The appeal was admitted on 13.12.2006 for determination of the following substantial question of law by this Court: "Whether exemption of capital gains under Section 54-B of the Act is allowable to the assessee in the absence of completion of sale transactions?" The facts, in brief, necessary for adjudication, as narrated in the appeal are that during the financial year 1997-98, relevant to the assessment year 1998-99, the appellant-assessee sold some agricultural land owned by him and his three brothers, and received a sum of Rs. 16,42,562/- i.e. 1/4th share out of the joint land and Rs. 17,57,644/- as sale consideration of his individual land. In respo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ose of working out the benefit of deduction u/s 54B. Since the amounts, far in excess of the capital gains had been invested in the purchase or had been utilized towards the purchase (in the shape of advances), nothing remained to be deposited in the specified account. The requirements of section 54B, therefore, stood complied with." Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue preferred appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal vide order impugned herein before this Court. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The Tribunal while upholding the order of the CIT(A) had held that the assessee had purchased the new asset in the form of agricultural lands or had made adva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gains which is not utilized by the assessee for the purpose of the new assets before the date of filing of return under Section 139 shall be deposited by him before furnishing such return. Undisputedly, the assessee purchased the new assets or made the advance payment for the purchase of the new asset before the expiry of time for furnishing the return and was utilized by the assessee, so there is no question of attraction of this subsection when the assessee had already utilized this amount where is the question of depositing the amount in the specified account, as declared by the Central Government. If this issue is analyzed from different angle whether the assessee is having income from any other sources of income. On this count also not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion pronounced by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Janrudhan Das (1987) 163 ITR 806 (All.) and also from the decision of the High Court of Kerala pronounced in the case of P.K. Kesavan Nair Vs. CIT (1988) 174 ITR 253 (Ker.). This is also not the case of the revenue that the land in question was not agricultural land or was not used for agricultural purposes so as to disentitle the assessee for benefit of Section 54B. For this purpose, we are fortified by the decision pronounced by the High Court of Allahabad in the case of Handicrafts Industries vs. CIT (1995) 216 ITR 522, 524 (All.) In view of these facts and judicial pronouncements we are upholding the order of the learned CIT(A), the appeal of the revenue is dis....