TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 243
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f I.T. Act amounting to Rs. 69,30,8000/- made by the AO. ii) The appellant craves the right to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee filed his return of income for the relevant assessment year 2006-07 on 30.3.2007 declaring total income of Rs. 1,95,030/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) was served on the assessee. During the relevant assessment year, the assessee had claimed to have earned capital gain of Rs. 1,62,36,847/- on sale of agricultural land at Sonepat, Haryana on 22.3.2006 and invested the same in the purchase of another agricultural land at Rajasthan worth of Rs. 1,73....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sited a sum of Rs. 62 lacs in fixed deposits with State Bank of India vide FDR No. 053481 on 12.10.2006. This FD was encashed prematurely on 10.11.2006 and further land of Rs. 39,30,800/- was purchased. After this, another FD for Rs. 30 lacs was made from State 8ank of India bearing No. 53500 dated 17.02.2007. The balance land was purchased after getting this FD encashed on 19.12.2007. It was pointed out that the AO missed the FDR of Rs. 62 lacs prepared on 12.10.2006 while issuing the said notice. Nothing happened on this notice thereafter which gave a presumption that the assessing officer was satisfied about the amount having been invested in FDRs before the date of filing of returns. Later on, the Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of reassessment, the Ld. First Appellate Authority has observed that AO has reopened the assessment and no new or tangent material has been brought on record to show that any income has escaped assessment by reason of the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all materials facts necessary for his assessment for the relevant assessment year. The reasons recorded by the AO do not indicate that his reason to believe was on ground of failure of the assessee to disclose material particulars truly and correctly. The notice was issued beyond 4 years. The reasons do not say that the assessee does not show any tangible material that created the reason to believe that income had escaped. Rather, the reassessment proceedings....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xpenses of Rs. 4,42,560/-. Thus, the aggregate amount of investment in the purchase of land by the appellant was of Rs. 1,73,84,870/-. From the above, it is clear that the assessee has invested in the purchase of agricultural land within the period of two year i.e. before 21.03.2008 the whole amount of long term capital gain earned on the sale of agricultural land. As per Section 54B, capital gain on transfer of land used for agricultural purposes are not to be charged if the capital gains arises from the transfer of the capital asset being agricultural land has been invested within a period of two year after the date of sale of capital asset being land for income tax purposes. In this case, there is no dispute that the impugned agricultura....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o year from the sale of the capital asset i.e. agricultural land. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that the exemption uls 54B of the I.T. Act has to be allowed on the amount of Rs. 69,80,300/-. In a similar case namely CIT vs. Jagriti Aggarwal, 15 Taxmann.com 146(2011), the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana has held "Sub-section (4) of section 139 is, in fact, a proviso to sub-section (1) of section 139. Section 139 fixes the different dates for filing the returns for different assessees. In the case of assessee, it is 31st day of July of the assessment year in terms of clause (e) of the Explanation 2 to sub-section (1) of section 139, whereas sub-section (4) of section 139 provides for extension in period of due date....