Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow V. Smt. Raj Rani, Barabanki

ITA 914/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 91423714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset
• Section: 50C

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.914/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010 11 ACIT RANGE - 5, LUCKNOW VS. SMT. RAJ RANI, W/O SHRI JANG BAHADUR VERMA, CHAUDHARY NAGAR, NAKA PARISAR, BARABANKI 225001. PAN:AASPR9425J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SRI RAKESH GARG, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 17/08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 1 /09/2015 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT (A) II LUCKNOW DATED 30.10.2014 FOR A.Y. 2010 11. 2. THE ONLY ONE EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS AS UNDER: - 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 42,83,354/ - IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE A.O. UNDER THE HEAD LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS U/S 50C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT ON PAGES 10 TO 11 OF THE PAPER BOOK IS COPY OF KHASARA & 2 KHATAUNI AND ON PAGES 36 TO 37 OF THE PAPER BOOK IS COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD, BARABANKI AND BY TEHSILDAR, NAWABGANJ, BARABANKI AND AS PER THESE DOCUMENTS, IT GETS ESTABLISHED THAT THE IMPUGNED LAND SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE WAS AGRICULTURAL LAND SITUATED OUTSIDE THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT OF BARABANKI AS IT IS NOT A CAPITAL ASSET IN VIEW OF SECTION 2 (14) (III). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT LEARNED CIT (A) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE ON THIS BASIS THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2 (14) (III), THE LAND IN QUESTION IS NOT A CAPITAL ASSET AS IT IS BEYOND THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT. HE HAS ALSO GIVEN A FINDING THAT NOTIFICATION NO. SO10 (E) DATED 06.01.1994 AS AMENDED BY NOTIFICATION NO. SO1302 DATED 28.12.1999, DISTRICT BARABANKI IS NOT COVERED THROUGH THE CIRCULAR. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FINDING OF CIT (A) AND HENCE, IT HAS TO BE ACCEPTED THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION WAS NOT A CAPITAL ASSET AND THEREFORE, GAIN ON SALE OF IT IS NOT LIABLE TO CAPITAL GAIN TAX U/S 45. SECTION 50C IS ALSO NOT APPLICABLE BECAUSE IT IS APPLICABLE ONLY WHEN A CAPITAL ASSET IS TRANSFERRED BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 1 /09/2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR