TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ertificate dated 13.12.2010 stating that the Valshind village is about 1600 to 1700 meters from the BNMC jurisdictional limit". 3. "The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that as per the map submitted by the AC, there is a motorable road cutting the Mumbai Nashik Bhivandi Byepass, leading to Pise Dam as per which the overall road distance of the assessee's plot from the municipal limits of BNMC is only 5.5 kms, and that the notification issued in respect of section 2(14)(iii)(b) is very clear that the distance of 8 kms from the municipal limits should be considered in all directions". 4. "The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the Dy Collector of Urban Land Development vide order dated 24.5.2007 has described the land as urban land and that no agricultural activity was carried on by the assessee and no agricultural income was declared by the assessee in his return of income for any of the preceding years". 3. The entire grievance of the Revenue can be summed up as relating to the sale of one piece of land which the assessee claimed to be an agricultural land whereas the Revenue's claim is that the said piece of land do not fulfill the conditions of the provisions of Sec. 2(14)(ii....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out by the assessee on this land which is proved from the fact that the assessee has not declared any agricultural income in the preceding years in the return of income filed. 4.2. In order to verify the claim of the assessee, the AO sent a letter to the Dy. Supdt. Of Land Records, Maharashtra State, Jakat Naka, Bhiwandi. The Dy. Supdt. of Land Records vide his letter dt. 13.12.2010 certified that the land is only 1600 to 1700 meters from the Municipal limits of BNMC. In order to verify the genuineness of the certificate issued by the Sarpanch Shri Anant B. Madhvi, the AO issued summons u/s. 131 of the Act. Shri Anant B. Madhvi responded to this summon , whose statement was recorded in which Shri Anant B. Madhvi stated that the distance of 12 Kms certified by him is from the BNMC office and State Transport bus stand of Bhiwandi. The AO also confronted with the certificate received from Dy. Supdt. of Land Records to which Shri Anant B. Madhvi stated that he is totally ignorant of the jurisdiction of BNMC and its outer limits. After considering the statement of Sarpanch, the AO rejected the certificate issued by him. The AO issued a show cause to the assessee asking for his reply on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the jurisdiction of BNMC, as certified by the Dy. Supdt. of Land Records. The AO also dismissed the Google map stating that in the Google map, some of the states of our own country are shown as part of other neighboring countries. The AO finally went personally to verify the actual distance of the land from the Brahman Pada of Pogaon Village from where he took the motorable road cutting the Mumbai Nashik Bhiwandi Bypass leading to Pise Dam. The distance was only 3.5 kms from which spot the impugned land was at a distance of 2 Kms. only. Thus the AO finally concluded that the road distance of assessee's land from the Municipal limits of BNMC is only 5.5. kms. Having come to this conclusion, the AO went on to tax capital gain on sale of land as per the provisions of law. 5. Aggrieved by this, assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A). Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee reiterated his contention that the impugned land was beyond 8 Kms. From the Municipal limits and relied upon the evidences already produced before the AO. Emphasizing on the certificate from Tahasildar, Bhiwandi who certified that the assessee is an agriculturist , copy of 7/12 extract showing that the land....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve strongly supported the findings of the AO. It is the say of the Ld. DR that the Ld. CIT(A) has accepted some additional evidence which is in violation of Rule 46A and therefore should not have been considered by the Ld. CIT(A) without affording any opportunity to the AO. 7. Per contra, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly submitted that the certificate filed by the assessee during the course of the Appellate proceedings was at the insistence of the Ld. CIT(A) which is covered by the powers conferred to the Ld. CIT(A) by virtue of Sec. 250(4) of the Act. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that there is no violation of Rule 46A by the Ld. CIT(A).In support of this contention reliance was placed on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Industrial Roadways 112 ITD 293. On merit of the case, the Ld. Counsel reiterated what has been submitted before the lower authorities and relied upon the evidences which were placed before the lower authorities. 8. We have heard the rival parties and carefully perused the orders of the lower authorities and the relevant material evidence brought on record. The entire dispute revolves around the issue whether the impugned agricultural land....