2019 (6) TMI 1466

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ows:- The assessee along with his wife, was in possession of 47.54 Ares of land at Survey No.606/4 in Vizhinjam village. The same was sold by executing a sale deed in favour of Vizhinjam International Seaport for a total consideration of Rs. 3,22,99,490, out of this the share of the assessee is Rs. 1,61,49,745. For the assessment year 2013-2014, the assessee filed return of income claiming the entire sale consideration received as exempt from tax. It was claimed that the said property, which was taken over by Vizhinjam International Seaport, was an agricultural land and was compulsorily acquired by the Government of Kerala. Therefore, it was submitted that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of section 10(37) of the I.T.Act. The Ass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd which was acquired by the Vizhinjam International Seaport, was admittedly agricultural land and the CIT(A) had accepted the impugned land to be agricultural land after perusing certificate issued by the Agricultural Officer showing the nature of land at the time of acquisition. It was further submitted that the assessee had declared agricultural income from the said land for assessment years 2011-2012 to 2013- 2014. It was stated that the sale deed executed in favour of the Vizhinjam Port Trust also grants compensation for loss of standing trees. Hence, it was submitted that the impugned land was admittedly a agricultural land and agricultural operation was carried on it prior to the date of acquisition of the same. As regards the findin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) had categorically held merely because the sale price was fixed through a negotiated settlement, the character of acquisition would still remain compulsory. The relevant finding of the Hon'ble Apex Court reads as follows:- "8. In our view, insofar as acquisition of the land is concerned, the same was compulsorily acquired as the entire procedure prescribed under the LA Act was followed. The settlement took place only qua the amount of the compensation which was to be received by the appellant for the land which had been acquired. It goes without saying that had steps not been taken by the Government under Sections 4 and 6 followed by award under Section 9 of the LA Act, the appellant would not have agreed to divest the land belonging to ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e said land. The said property was sold to Vizhinjam Port Trust on 31.07.2012. The Assessing Officer's finding that the said land is not an agricultural land is based on inspection report after 45 months from the date of transfer i.e. on 28.01.2016. The CIT(A) had allowed the claim of deduction u/s 10(37) based on the certificate produced by the assessee and the details of agricultural income returned for assessment years 2011-2012 to 2013-2014. The assessee and his wife were maintaining the entire agricultural operation and both of them had shown agricultural income in the return of income. The agricultural income returned by the assessee from this land for assessment year 2011-2012 is Rs. 100,000, for assessment year 2012-2013 is Rs. 2,65....