, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : CHENNAI . , , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P.GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO.380/CHNY/2017 ( IN . /I.T.A. NO.1564/MDS/2015 ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-2012. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 2 COIMBATORE. VS. M/S. KPR DEVELOPERS LTD, 5, AKS NAGAR, THADAGAM ROAD, R.S. PURAM, COIMBATORE 641 001. [PAN AADCK 4094L] (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : MS. VIJAYAPRABHA, IRS, JCIT. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE ! ' # $% /DATE OF HEARING : 13-04-2018 &' # $% /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-04-2018 / O R D E R PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: REVENUE IN THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS AGGRIEVE D THAT THE TRIBUNAL DID NOT ADJUDICATE ONE OF THE GROUNDS RAIS ED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL WITH REGARD TO CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL IN COME ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT OF B5,00,000/- BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS). 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. MAIN ISSUE RA ISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS W ITH REGARD TO A M. P.NO.380/2017 :- 2 -: DIRECTION OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S) TO TREAT THE SURPLUS ARISING ON SALE OF 32.37 ACRES OF RURAL AGR ICULTURAL LAND AT KITTAMPALAYAM VILLAGE, SULUR TALUK AS NOT EXIGIBLE TO CAPITAL GAINS. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ORIGINALLY TREATED THE GA INS AS TAXABLE REJECTING THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE LAND SOLD WAS AGRICULTURAL IN NATURE. ON APPEAL, THE LD. COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, HOLDI NG THAT LAND IN QUESTION WAS AGRICULTURAL IN NATURE. LD. COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ALSO ALLOWED AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF B5,0 0,000/- OUT OF A TOTAL CLAIM OF B13,75,000/- BY THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE MATTER REACHED THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL AFFIRMED THE ORDER OF TH E LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HOLDING THE LAND TO BE AGRI CULTURAL IN NATURE. THE GROUND NOW URGED BY THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE AS NOT ADJUDICATED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IS REPRODUCED HER EUNDER:- HAVING ERRONEOUSLY TREATED THE LAND AS AGRICULTU RE, LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FURTHER ERRED IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME PARTIALLY TO THE EXTENT OF B5,00,000/- . IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE GROUND THAT THE GRIEVANC E IS AN OFFSHOOT OF MAIN ISSUE, AS TO THE NATURE OF THE LAND HELD BY THE ASSESSEE. LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD CLEARLY HE LD THE LAND TO BE AGRICULTURAL IN NATURE AND ALSO FOUND THAT ASSESSE E HAD 120 ACRES OF SUCH LAND APART FROM WHAT WAS SOLD BY IT. LD. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD THUS CONSIDERED THE CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL M. P.NO.380/2017 :- 3 -: INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF B.5,00,000/- TO BE FAIR AN D REASONABLE. THOUGH THE TRIBUNAL HAD NOT SPECIFICALLY ADJUDICATE D THE ISSUE, ONCE IT HAD UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) ON THE NATURE OF THE LAND HELD BY THE ASSESSEE, IT BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION MEANT THAT THE CLAIM OF AGRICULTURAL I NCOME TO THE EXTENT CONFIRMED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) ALSO STOOD AFFIRMED. HOWEVER, JUST TO GIVEN QUIETUS TO THE ISSUE, WE AFFIRM THAT AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF B5,00,000/-, ALLOWED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WAS JUST AND FAIR. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, WE DISMISS THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON 13 TH APRIL, 2018, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ! ' ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) $ %& / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) ' / CHENNAI * / DATED: 13 TH APRIL, 2018. KV + # ,$- . / . $ / COPY TO: 1. 0 / APPELLANT 3. ! 1$ ( ) / CIT(A) 5. .45 ,$6 / DR 2. ,70 / RESPONDENT 4. ! 1$ / CIT 6. 58 9' / GF