Ghanshyam Shankarrao Ashtankar , Nagpur V. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1), Nagpur

ITA 54/NAG/2020

AI Insights

The case revolves around the appeal by Ghanshyam Shankarrao Astankar against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Nagpur, which upheld the Assessing Officer's decision treating the assessee's agricultural land as a capital asset within 8 KM of Nagpur's municipal limits. The primary contention was the measurement of the distance of the assessee's land from the municipal limits, which the assessee claimed was 8.64 KM as per a certificate from the Nagpur Improvement Trust, contrary to the Assessing Officer's Google Maps measurement. Additionally, the assessee contested the taxation of the entire sales proceeds of the land, despite not receiving a part of it amounting to Rs. 7,100,000.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136613 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GHANSHYAM SHANKARRAO
• Keywords: Capital asset; Competent authority
• Section: 2(14)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.54/NAG./2020 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Ghanshyam Shankarrao Astankar, Sumthana Tahsil, Hingna Distt Nagpur. PIN – 441 122 Maharashtra PAN ATTPA7605F vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3 (1), Ground Flor, Saraf Chambers, Sdar, Nagpur, Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ghanshyam Shankarrao Asthankar [Party-in-Person] For Revenue : Shri Sanjay Agrawal Date of Hearing : 01.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 28.09.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015- 2016, arises against the CIT(A)-2, Nagpur’s Order in Appeal No.CIT(A)-2/364/2017-18 ITBA No.10526, dated 27.12.2019, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. The assessee raises the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal : 2 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 1. “That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A)2, Nagpur was not justified in not considering the Areal Distance of 8 Kms from the side of the Area where Assessees Agricultural Land was situated and this honourable court be pleased to allow the same, as claimed U/s 2(14) (iii)(a) b(iii). 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A)2, Nagpur was not justified in not considering the Non Receipt Of Rs.7100000/- out of sales consideration of Rs.14600000/- while taxing the entire sales proceeds and this honorable court be pleased to allow the deduction of Rs.7100000/- which was never received by the appellant. 3. Any other ground as may be raised at the time of hearing of this appeal, for which the appellant craves leave.” 3. Next comes CIT(A)'s detailed discussion upholding the Assessing Officer’s action treating the assessee’s land/capital asset transferred in the relevant previous year as failing within 8 KM u/sec.2(14)(iii)(a) and (b) as under : 3 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 4 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 5 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 6 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 7 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 8 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 4. Suffice to say, the only issue before us is regarding distance of the assessee’s land transferred in the relevant previous year as to whether the same falls within or beyond 8 KM distance from Nagpur city’s municipal limits. The Revenue could hardly dispute that the ‘Nagpur Improvement Trust’ had indeed issued a certificate in favour of the assessee that his land was situated at a distance of 8.64 KM from municipal limits as per the assessment discussion itself at page-2 para-4 in assessment order dated 18.12.2016. The Revenue placed vehement reliance on the Assessing Officer’s subsequent discussion in para-4 wherein he had measured the impugned distance by google map which culminated in the Assessing Officer’s land transferred getting treated as a capital asset within the meaning of sec.2(14) of the Act. 5. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the vehement rival stands and find merit in assessee’s arguments for the precise reason that the competent authority herein i.e., ‘Nagpur Improvement Trust’ had already issued a certificate certifying the exact distance of assessee’s land from municipal limits. We thus conclude that merely because some google map assistant indicated the distance less than that would hardly support the Revenue’s stand. We thus accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 9 ITA.No.54/NAG./2020 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.09.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 28 th September, 2023 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A)-2, Nagpur. 4. The PCIT concerned, Nagpur. 5. D.R. ITAT, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 6. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune. S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 25.09.2023 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 26.09.2023 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Author .09.2023 J.M. 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member .09.2023 A.M. 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS .09.2023 Sr.PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on .09.2023 Sr.PS 7 Date of uploading of Order .09.2023 Sr.PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk .09.2023 Sr.PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order