2012 (6) TMI 239
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as mutated in his name in the year 1956. The aforesaid land was sold to M/s. Vatika Limited for a total consideration of Rs. 1,61,09,100/- vide registered sale deed dated 12.10.2006. In order to claim various exemptions including exemption under Section 54B of the Income Tax Act, the assessee purchased new agricultural land for a total consideration of Rs. 1,22,71,440/- in the name of his son and daughter-in-law. The Assessing Officer, having considered the matter ad-longum, vide its order dated 18.12.2009, assessed the capital gain of Rs. 1,59,83,761/-, in the hands of the assessee-appellant, liable for charging to tax. Dissatisfied with the order of Assessing Officer, the appellant-assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 'Purchased any other land for being used for agricultural purposes which necessarily means that the new asset should be in the name of the assessee himself. In the case of Gurnam Singh (supra), it was noticed by the Tribunal that the assessee's son was shown in the sale deed as co-owner. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court held that no substantial question of law is involved because it is not the case of the revenue that the land in question was exclusively used by the son of the assessee. We therefore, uphold the findings of the ld. CIT (A) that no deduction u/s 54B will be available on the issue of purchase of land in the name of his son and wife.' " 4. The appellant-assessee has filed the instant appeal challenging the order pass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w for a total consideration of Rs. 1,22,71,440/-. It is relevant to note that the land sold was in the name of appellant-assessee, while the land purchased was in the name of his son and daughter-in-law. 7. A bare reading of Section 54B of the Income Tax Act does not suggest that assessee would be entitled to get exemption for the land purchased by him in the name of his son and daughter-in-law. In the facts and circumstances of the case also aforesaid inference has not been drawn. Same is question of fact. No substantial question of law arises in appeal. Question whether purchase was by assessee or by son, is a question of fact. 8. Secondly, the word "assessee" used in the Income Tax Act needs to be given a 'legal interpretation' and not....