TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (6) TMI 240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,02,08,850/- made on account of Long Term Capital Gain arising on transferring of land which was a capital assets as per provision of Section 2(14)(iii)(b) of the Act ignoring the facts highlighted in the assessment order. ii. The appellant craves to add, amend or modify the grounds of appeal at any time. 2. The facts in brief of the case are that the assessee sold its agriculture land located at village Kundli, Sonepat, district Sonepat (Haryana) for the sale consideration of Rs. 5,25,98,130/- and in the return of income filed, the assessee claimed exemption from tax on sale of agricultural land in terms of section 2(14)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). During the sc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the contention of the assessee. 4. Before us, the learned Senior DR relied on the decision of the Tribunal, 'F' Bench, Delhi in the case of ACIT Vs. Shree Vijay Singh Kadam (2014)(12) TMI, 599, ITA T Delhi in ITA No. 4733/Del/2011 (AY: 2006-07) dated 12/12/2014 and decision of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Smt. Anjana Sehgal in ITA 276 of 2004, reported in (2013) 40 taxmann.com 485 (Punjab and Haryana) and submitted that issue in dispute is covered against the assessee. 5. The learned counsel though relied on the finding of the Ld. CIT-A, but fairly conceded that issue in dispute was covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Anjana Sehg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from the local limits of municipal Corporation of Sonepat, which is the jurisdictional municipality. 7. We find that the Tribunal 'F' Bench, Delhi, in the case of Sh. Vijay Singh Kadam (supra) has followed the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of Smt. Anjana Sehgal (supra). The Hon'ble High Court in the case of Smt. Anjana Sehgal (supra) has held as under: "9. A perusal of the above provisions makes it clear that what is intended to be covered in the term "capital asset" is agricultural land comprised within the jurisdiction of a municipality and within the specified distance from the local limits of municipality or other local bodies mentioned therein as specified in the notification. It is u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... situated within the limits of any municipality (whether known as a municipality, municipal corporation, notified area committee, town area committee, town committee or by any other name) or a cantonment board having a population of 10,000 or more according to the last census for which the figures have been published before the first day of the previous year. Further, agricultural land situated in areas lying within a distance not exceeding 8 kilometers from the local limits of such municipalities or cantonment boards will also be covered by the amended definition of 'capital asset', if such areas are, having regard to the extent of and scope for their urbanization and other relevant considerations, notified by the Central Governmen....