TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (2) TMI 1482
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, 1961 ("the Act"). It was submitted that due to lack of proper guidance and legal assistance, the assessee was unable to file the appeal within the prescribed time. During the relevant period, the assessee was making efforts to engage a suitable counsel, met several counsels, and ultimately succeeded in engaging one, whereafter the present appeal came to be filed. It was submitted that the delay was thus occasioned due to bona fide reasons and circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, and there was neither any deliberate lapse nor any intention to delay the filing of the appeal. Accordingly, it was prayed that the delay may be condoned in the interest of justice and the appeal be admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative ("Ld. DR") objected to the condonation of delay and submitted that no sufficient cause has been shown by the assessee for the delay of 106 days and, therefore, the delay should not be condoned. 4. We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the assessee is an elderly senior citizen and the explanation furnished indicates that the del....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rming the order of the Assessing Officer wherein, an amount of Rs.53,98,288/-is 6 determined as capital gains, assuming that the assessee sold the land in square yards, whereas, the assessee sold the land in Acres. 7. The appellant craves leave to add to, amend or modify the above grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of the appeal, if it is considered necessary." 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who did not file any return of income for the assessment year 2011-12 under section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the Learned Assessing Officer ("Ld. AO"). However, the assessee again did not file any return of income in response to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act. The assessee also did not respond to the other notices issued by the Ld. AO during the course of reassessment proceedings. On the basis of available record, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee along with three other individuals had sold 5.68 acres of land situated at Joharapuram Village, Kurnool, v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ut properly appreciating the nature of the land. The Ld. AR further invited our attention to G.O.MS. No.144 dated 29.03.2018, issued by the Revenue (DA&LR) Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh, placed at page nos. 58 to 60 of the paper book, and submitted that Joharapuram Village was included in Kurnool (Urban) Mandal only with effect from 29.03.2018. Thus, prior to that date, Joharapuram Village was not part of any urban area. Since the land was sold during the financial year 2010-11, the land was situated in a rural area during the relevant period. It was contended that the agricultural land situated at Joharapuram Village during the year under consideration does not fall within the definition of "capital asset" as provided under section 2(14) of the Act and, therefore, no capital gains tax is leviable. The Ld. AR finally prayed that the addition made by the Ld. AO be deleted. 9. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee was non-responsive before the Ld. AO and also before Ld. CIT(A) failed to produce sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim that the land was agricultural land. The Ld. DR further obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....08.11.2010. On perusal of the letter, it is found that it was a communication to Jt. Sub-Registrar I, RO Kurnool to admit the registration of property which was sold by the appellant of Shri S. C Mohan Reddy. The property is mentioned as "land" and not "agricultural land" which was claimed by the appellant. The appellant submitted a letter issued by Jt Sub Registrar Kurnool dated 12/11/2018, wherein "classified as agricultural land" was handwritten removing the full-stop symbol annexing to the sentence which has no relevance to the land being agricultural land. This handwritten correction was not signed either. Therefore, in absence of other documentary evidence this document cannot be solely relied upon. No other government document was found available in the record which points to the fact that as per government record the impugned land is classified as agricultural land. The appellant has not filed relevant extract from the state land revenue authority which certifies the nature of land and the agricultural activity undertaken in the land. The second argument was that the land is mentioned as agricultural land in the sale deed. The appellant has not mentioned in which page of th....