SC: IMA Cautioned With Regard to Unethical Practices by its Members  ||  Kar. HC: Serious Stigma May be Caused on Person’s Character by Pre-Trial Detention  ||  Del. HC: Panel Lawyer of DSLSA is Not an Employee, Can’t be Entitled to Maternity Benefit  ||  Del. HC: Record Rooms of District Courts in Grim Situation, Record to be Weeded Out Efficiently  ||  Supreme Court Expresses Disappointment Over Inadequate Implementation of RPwD Act, 2016  ||  24,000 Teaching and Non-Teaching Jobs Invalidated by Calcutta High Court  ||  24,000 Teaching and Non-Teaching Jobs Invalidated by Calcutta High Court  ||  Del. HC: For Purposes of Article 19(6) of COI National Council for Teacher Education is ‘State’  ||  Karnataka High Court: Smoking Hookah as Addictive and Harmful as Smoking Cigarettes  ||  All. HC: Interest Can’t be Awarded by Labour Court In Proc. for Money Recovery from Empl. u/s 33C(2)    

Kishor Ganpat Karande vs. Income-Tax Officer - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (01 Dec 2022)

Authorities are required to assist the assessee in the assessment proceedings by giving effect to the correct position of law

MANU/IP/0805/2022

Direct Taxation

In present matter, the assessee raised grounds of appeal challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the order of AO in denying exemption under Section 54B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) and disallowance of improvement cost in the facts and circumstances of the case.

The evidences furnished amply shows that the land belonging to the assessee which was compulsorily acquired by the Government of Maharashtra is an agricultural land, the assessee was into agricultural activity during the period of two years immediately preceding the date of transfer was being used agricultural purposes by the assessee. Further, the said compensation was received by the assessee on or after 01-04-2004. Therefore, going by the conditions contemplated in clause (i) to (iv) of sub-section (37) of section 10 of the Act the compensation received by the assessee for compulsory acquisition of his land by the Government of Maharashtra is not chargeable under the head "Capital Gains" arising from transfer of agricultural land, therefore, do not form part of total income of the assessee. The assessee was into agricultural activity. The assessee is entitled to claim exemption under Section 10(37) of the Act.

As held by the High Court of Bombay in the case of Balmukund Acharya that, the authorities under the Act are required to assist the assessee in the assessment proceedings by giving effect on the correct position of law, even if the assessee makes wrong claim. The compensation derived from the Government of Maharashtra on the compulsory acquisition of assessee's land, the assessee is entitled to claim the same as exempted under Section 10(37) of the Act. Thus, the order of CIT(A) in confirming the view of AO in denying the deduction under Section 54B of the Act is not justified and the addition made thereon is deleted. The appeal of assessee is allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   EXEMPTION   ENTITLEMENT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved