2022 (5) TMI 138

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion Ward 1(2), Chennai u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the 'Act') for the assessment year 2013-14 vide his order 29.03.2016. The appeals by the assessee in WTA Nos.61/Chny/2017 & 75/Chny/2018 are arising out of different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai in ITA No.74/CIT(A)-16/2009-10 & 33/CIT(A)-16/AY 2010-11 dated 21.08.2017 & 07.05.2018. The assessments were framed by the WTO, International Taxation Ward 1(2), Chennai u/s.16(3) r.w.s. 17 of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter the 'WT Act') for the assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11 vide orders dated 29.12.2016 & 29.12.2017 respectively. ITA No.2627/CHNY/2017 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that the CIT(A) has not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment year 2013-14 sold an immovable property i.e., vacant land to the extent of 3 acres and 68 cents situated at 127, A Block, Panruti Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kanchipuram District on 06.06.2012 for sale consideration of Rs. 2,76,00,000/-. The assessee after arriving at long term capital gain at Rs. 21,95,913/- after claiming of indexation claimed deduction u/s.54F of the Act but the AO computed long term capital gains tax at Rs. 3,62,48,000/- after disallowing the assessee's claim of exemption u/s.54F of the Act. Before CIT(A), the assessee raised this issue that the land in question is agricultural land and CIT(A) after noticing the same noted and the same reads as under:- "Ground of appeal No.2, 3 & 4 On the issue of assessee's c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r: "Whether an assessee can amend a return filed by him for making a claim for deduction other than by filing a revised return - Held no" Therefore, in the absence of any revised return, the alternate claim, which is an after-thought, cannot be entertained and hence it is rejected. Therefore, for the purpose of computing long term capital gain, the assessee's claim that the land sold in question is agricultural land u/s 2(14) of the Act is rejected. Therefore, it is a capital asset for levying LTCG. The ground of appeal on this account is therefore dismissed." 3.1 The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the assessment order para 5 and stated that the assessee has filed details that the land sold is agricultural land and clai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....In support of this assessee placed before ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) a number of records to substantiate such claim. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) declined to admit the claim made by the assessee, citing a reason that Rule 46A did not permit admission of additional evidence, due to assessee's failure to produce the evidence before the ld. Assessing Officer . However, a reading of the assessment order clearly show that assessee's representative had mentioned loss of documents provided by the client to him in the Chennai floods. Letter dated 29.12.2015, filed by the ld. Authorised Representative before ld. Assessing Officer which is relevant and it is reproduced hereunder:- ''We are in receipt of your notice dt.l1.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gricultural or not and whether it was exigible to capital gains to the file of the Assessing Officer for consideration in accordance with law. Needless to say the question whether assessee's claim u/s. 54F of the Act merited admission is kept open. In view of the above, the ld.counsel stated that exactly on identical lines, the matter can be remitted back to the file of the AO and issues on merits be kept open. 4. On the other hand, the ld.CIT-DR could not controvert the above factual situation and however, he relied on the assessment order and that of the CIT(A). 5. After hearing rival contentions and going through the facts, we noted that the assessee sold the land at 127, A Block, Panruti Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kanchipuram Dis....