2020 (1) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has invested the amount from herself and not on the basis of purchase of asset benami in the name of wife. 3. That the Worthy CIT(A) has failed to consider that there is a direct nexus of investment in the agricultural land purchased by the assessee from the sale proceeds of the agricultural land used by him for agricultural purpose land sold and because the investment has been made in the name of the assessee's wife it could not mean that the investment in the land is not made by the assessee. As such, there was due compliance of the provisions of section 54 B. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in placing reliance upon the findings of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court as reported in 306 ITR 335 and not following the later judgments of other Hon'ble High Court Decisions and Hon'ble Delhi ITAT decision in TTA No. 5456/Del./20i4. 5. That the Worthy CIT(A) has failed to consider the fact that agricultural land, though, purchased in the name of the wife, but assessee is the absolute owner of the same since the entire purchase consideration is paid by the assessee"ouTof the amount received from the sale of the land. 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e name of his wife and has subsequently claimed exemption u/s 54B of the Income Tax Act. The AO has highlighted that since the conditions laid down in section 54B has not been fulfilled, this claim could not be allowed. In this regard, the relevant portion of the provision of section 54B are reproduced as under:- 54B. "[Subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), where the capital gain arises] from the transfer of a capital asset being land which, in the two years immediately preceding the date on which* the transfer took place, was being used by [the Assessee being an individual or his parent, or a Hindu undivided family] for agricultural purposes [(hereinafter referred to as the original asset)], and the assessee has, within a period of two years after that date, purchased any other land for being used for agricultural purposes, then, instead of the capital gain being charged to income-tax as income of the previous year in which the transfer took place, it shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section." On going through the provision it is clear that the assessee had to purchase agricultural land and there is no provision for ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad.)" The Hon'ble Court has clearly highlighted that there was no such intention to extend the benefit either to the wife or other close relatives of the assessee. ; 3) It is also important to consider that if the logic extended by the AR of the appellant is accepted, that the investment can be made in the name of any other person and the only condition required was that investment should be made in agricultural land, then the investment be could be made even in the name of any stranger without exception. Even though the provision of the Act has not used the word related to ownership, there is no doubt that the intention of the Act was clearly that the assessee himself should have purchased the agricultural land. It is always important to appreciate that the language of the legal provisions are very crucial and in the present case the Act does not provide any liberty to the assessee for making investment in agricultural land relating to purchase made in the name of wife of any other person. 4) Reliance is also placed upon the decision of Dinesh Verma in ITA No. 381 of 2014 dated 06.07.2015 (P&H) where the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court held tha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 1,10,250 dated 29.12.2006 Rs. 1,32,666 dated 29.12.2006 Rs. 2,38,400 dated 26.12.2006 Rs. 3,15,366 dated 23.05.2006 The purchase of lands was made on different dates and no two purchases relates to each other. Moreover these lands were purchased within two years from the date of sale of agricultural land and therefore becomes eligible for capital gain exemption u/s 54B of Income Tax Act. Case Law: In the ITA No.6390/ DEL/ 2016, the assessee Mr. Rohtas Singh had sold an agriculture land for a consideration of Rs. 38300000/- and the assessee had invested the sales consideration of Rs. 14330500/- in the agriculture land bought in the name of his spouse and Rs. 10876000/- in his own name, as the assessee had invested the sales consideration in the purchasing of agriculture land and the ITAT, Delhi in this case had restored the matter to the CIT(A) to pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with the law. The copy of the order of the ITAT, Delhi has been attached herewith. Conclusion: You are requested to kindly allow the assessee the exemption under sec.54B for purchase of the agriculture land in the name of his spouse. Further, as ....