TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 180
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeds against land is subject to Capital Gain Tax. The Ld. Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) Panaji has also erred and acted illegally in confirming the same. 2. Because the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred and acted illegally in confirming the addition of Rs. 51,54,197/-. The Ld. Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals Panaji has also erred and acted illegally in confirming the same." ITA NO.174/VNS/2024 1. Because the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred and acted illegally in treating the agricultural land situated much beyond the urban agglomeration area as non-agricultural and have hold that the sale proceeds against land is subject to Capital Gain Tax. The Ld. Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) Panaji has also erred and acted illegally in confirming the same. 2. Because the Ld. Assessing Officer has erred and acted illegally in confirming the addition of Rs. 51,54,197/-. The Ld. Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals Panaji has also erred and acted illegally in confirming the same." (B) In the case of Manoj Kumar Singh, assessment order dated 26.12.2019 was passed u/s 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant and information available on record as under: "7.1 Ground no.01 raised by the appellant is related with the issue that whether the land sold was a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14)(iii) which is adjudicated on the basis of facts of the case, merit and impugned assessment order as under: Upon careful perusal of impugned assessment order and information available or record it is seen that the appellant has contended that the land sold was agricultural land situated in a village having population of less than ten thousand and therefore falls outside the definition of "capital asset" u/s 2(14)(iii). Section 2(14)(iii) excludes from the definition of capital asset agricultural land in India which is not situated, within the jurisdiction of a municipality or cantonment board having population of not less than ten thousand; or, within specified distance from such municipality depending upon population. The AO has recorded categorical findings in the assessment order that: The land was situated within the notified distance from the municipal limits. The area falls within the prescribed aerial distance as per CBDT Notification issued i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....x under the head "Capital Gains". In CIT v. George Henderson & Co. Ltd., the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the full value of consideration received on transfer is to be taken for computing capital gains. Further, in CIT v. Attili N. Rao, it was held that once transfer is established, computation provisions follow automatically. The appellant has failed to establish that the receipt was exempt or not liable to tax under any specific provision. Therefore, the AO was correct in bringing Rs. 51,54,197/- to tax under the head capital gains. Accordingly, ground no.02 raised by the appellant being devoid of merit is dismissed herewith. 7.3 Ground no.03 raised by the appellant is related with the issue that whether capital gain was computed properly under Chapter IV-Ewhich is adjudicated on the basis of facts of the case, merit and impugned assessment order as under: Upon careful perusal of impugned assessment order and information available or record it is seen that the AO has computed capital gains after considering: Full value of consideration; Cost of acquisition as available on record; Applicable provisions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the paper book and submitted that these documents clearly established that the land sold by assessee was agricultural land. He further submitted that even in the sale deeds dated 15.05.1998 and 05.04.2004, the property was specifically described as agricultural land. On the strength of these evidences, the Ld. Counsel contended that the land sold by the assessee was agricultural land and, therefore, the provisions relating to long-term capital gains were not applicable to the transaction. The Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order as well as the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). (D) We have heard both sides. We have perused the materials on records. We find on perusal of the assessment order that the Assessing Officer conducted a field enquiry through the Inspector, who submitted a report stating that the land sold by the assessee was residential in nature. It is also recorded in the assessment order that the Assessing Officer had made enquiries from the Government authorities, namely the offices of the Tehsildar and the SDM. However, no report from those authorities has been brought on record. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) observed that the Assessing ....