TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1724
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) was justified in ignoring the fact that the addition made by AO on the basis of credible evidence against the assessee available on recored. iii) The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT (A) may please be cancelled and the order of Assessing office may please be restored. iv) The appellant prays to adduce such further evidence to substantiate his case. v) The appellant prays leave to add, alter, clarify, amend and or withdraw any grounds of appeal as and when the occasion demands." 2. Assessee has filed Cross Objection appeal in C.O.No.10/PUN/2024. Brief facts of the case : 3. In this case the Income Tax Officer(ITO), Ward-2(3), Nashik had observed that during the assessment, Mr. Ashok S. Sonawane for A.Y. 2013-14 which was completed u/sec. 143(3) accepting the returned income and by allowing deduction u/sec. 54B of the Act. However, on perusal of the records, the ITO observed that Mr. Ashok S. Sonawane had sold the land in violation of Section 63 of Bombay Land Revenue Code by selling the land to a person who intended to use for Non-agricultural use. Ms. Smita Ashok Sonawane is wife of Mr. As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....16 is required to be consistently followed in the order dated 19.12.2019 for AY 2013-14. 10.5 For what has been outliened above and for the reasons stated above, it is held that on the pertaining facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant has sold agricultural land which is situated in rural area and is situated more than 08 kms away from municipal limits and hence as per provisions of section 2(14) of the Act, the said impugned land is not capital asset and accordingly no capital gain on sale of agricultural land is chargeable to tax. For the very same, reasons, the AO has, thus fallen into error by treating the stamp value of the impugned land as stamp value of non-agricultural land and thereby adding the adding the difference between the stamp value and set forth value under the head 'Short Term Capital Gain' while assessing the case under consideration u/s 143(3) rws 147 of the Act. The action of the AO is, therefore, disapproved of the AO is, thus, directed to delete the said addition. Consequently, the Ground Nos. 4 to 6 raised by the appellant are allowed." 4. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed appeal and assessee filed Cross Obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....kind direction is solicited u/s 144A of the IT Act, 1961 for finalization of scrutiny assessment for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the above case. The case record of Shri Ashok Somnath Sonawane for the A.Y. 2013-14 in one volume and Smita Ashok Sonowane for the A. Y. 2014-15 in one volume are being submitted with this letter for your kind perusal and necessary direction. The scrutiny assessment in the case of Smita Ashok Sonavane far the AY 2014-15 Is getting time barred on 31.12.2016.' 02. On receipt of the reference from the ITO Wd 2(1), Nashik as mentioned in para 01 above, the assessee was called upon to attend personally or through her Authorized Representative on 17/11/2016. Explanation was sought on the issues raised by the ITO Wd 2(1), Nashik in the pending assessment proceedings for A.Y 2014-15, which has been reproduced in para 01 above. 03. On the said date, Shri Suhas A. Vadulekar, CA from M/s. Anand Bang &Associates, CAs duly authorised attended and the case was heard. Written submissions were filed on the said date and on 23/11/2016 and the issues involved were discussed at length. During the proceedings, the Authorized Representative of the assessee, in addit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....discussed in the context of Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948, as per which no sale of agricultural land is valid in favourof a person who is not an agriculturist. 05.1 On the above issues, the Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that the facts of the present case are totally different from the facts emerging from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarifabibi Mohammad Ibrahim and Ors. (supra). Further, in respect of the provisions of section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948, it is submitted by the Authorized Representative of the assessee that these provisions have no relevance to the issue of taxation on the transfer of land from an agriculturist to a person who is not an agriculturist. Directions: 06. The submissions made during the proceedings were examined in the context of the reference made by the AO and the case records. It is clearly seen that the facts as emerging from the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Sarifabibi Mohammad Ibrahim and Ors. (supra) are not in consonance from the case of the assessee. The facts emergi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld. CIT(A) also held that the land sold was situated in rural area at a distance of more than 8 kms from Municipal Limits, hence as per section 2(14) of the Act, it was not a capital asset and hence, no capital gain on sale of agricultural land. 7.3 In this case, Revenue has not brought on record any new facts. In the case of assessee for A.Y. 2014-15, returned income has been accepted vide order dated 05.12.2016, based on the direction issued by Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-2, Nashik for A.Y. 2014-15. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we agree with the ld. CIT(A) that Revenue cannot change the stand in the case of the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14 when the issue involved is identical. Therefore, we uphold the order of ld.CIT(A). 7.4 Even otherwise, the ld. CIT(A) has given a finding that impugned land is at a distance more than 08 kms from Municipal Limits. We have perused the copy of the registered Agreement for Sale dated 24.10.2012 which is at page no. 40 to 51 of the paper book. It is mentioned in the said agreement for sale, that the impugned land is agricultural land and purchaser is an agriculturalist. We have also perused the cer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ining to the assessee are as under : ⮚ In the case of the Assessee the Land was an agricultural Land as per Revenue Record. ⮚ The land is agricultural land even on 12.07.2016 i.e.much after the sale as per the certificate issued by Tahsildar in which Tahsildar has categorically stated that till today land is used for the purpose of agriculture. ⮚ The Land has not been converted into Non-Agricultural Land even after the Sale. ⮚ The Land is situated beyond 8 kms from the Municipal Limits. ⮚ Agricultural operations were continuously performed on the impugned land till date of sale. ⮚ Consideration paid as per rate applicable for Agricultural land in the area. ⮚ No construction carried out on the impugned land even after the sale. ⮚ The only objection of the revenue was that the impugned land has been sold to Prospective Estate and Reality Logical solutions Pvt Ltd. However, as per the Agreement to Sale the buyer is an Agricultural company. 7.8 When we analyse all these facts of the case, respectfully following the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision(supr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....•à¥‡à¤²à¥‡à¤²à¥‡ सरà¥à¤µà¥à¤¹à¥‡ नं. ची शेत जमीन दाखल असलà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤šà¥‡ दिसà¥à¤¨ येत आहे. मौजे शिरगांव येथील फे कà¥à¤°. ६८१ व मौजे लेनाड येथील फे.कà¥à¤°. १०२६ व १०२९ अनà¥à¤µà¤¯à¥‡ में. पà¥à¤°à¥‰à¤¸à¥à¤ªà¥‡à¤Ÿà¤¿à¤µà¥à¤¹ इसà¥à¤Ÿà¥‡à¤Ÿ अॅनà¥à¤¡ रीअॅलीटी लोजिकल सोलà¥à¤¯à¥à¤¶à¤¨à¥à¤¸ पà¥à¤°à¤¾.लि. तरà¥à¤«à¥‡ डायरेकà¥à¤Ÿà¤° जयदीप के. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....à¥à¤¦), ता. शहापूर जि. ठाणे ४२/१ब ०-८०-० १-३२ ५२/शà¥à¤• १-००-० ०-८३ ५२/१à¥à¤¡ ०-८६-४ 0-40 14 उपरोकà¥à¤¤ नमूद केलेलà¥à¤¯à¤¾ शेत जमीनी आज पावेतो शेत जमिन मà¥à¤¹à¤£à¥‚नच वापरात आहेत. तà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤•à¤¾à¤®à¥€ वर नमूद केलेलà¥à¤¯à¤¾ सरà¥à¤µà¥à¤¹à¥‡ नं. चà¥à¤¯à¤¾ शेतीजमीनीचे सदà¥à¤¯à¤¸à¥à¤¥à¤¿à¤¤à¥€à¤¤à¥€à¤² à¥/१२ उतारे (सातबारा ....