Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 1041 - AT - Income TaxIndexed cost of acquisition and improvement - lower authorities have taken the fair market value of land as on 01-04-1981 at ₹ 60,483/- by backward indexing of the DLC rates as on 5-08-1998 of the agricultural land and thereby indexing it to ₹ 4,30,034/- as against the assessee's claim of fair market value of the land as on 01-04-1981 at ₹ 1,21,000/- based on sale deed of house dated 10-07-1985 and thereby indexing it to ₹ 8,60,310/- - Held that:- The fair market value of the land as on 01-04-1981 determined by the assessee at ₹ 1,21,000/- on the basis of sale deed dated 10-07-1985 (PB 20-22) of a house of 52.14 sq. yard sold for ₹ 12,000/- is more reasonable. This is because as per this sale deed the rate works out at ₹ 222/- per sq. Yard. The assessee's land is 3,607 sq. yard and adopting this rate its value comes to ₹ 8,00,754/- but assessee has only considered approximately 15% of this value i.e. ₹ 1,20,113/- which is rounded off by the assessee to ₹ 1,21,000/- as the fair market value of the agricultural land as on 01-04-1981. Further, the cost of improvement claimed on account of land levelling charges of ₹ 20,000/- to remove the Kachi Dol and to make the land even which because of the irrigation nail was uneven by using the JCB is reasonable. Therefore, the AO is directed to consider the indexed cost of acquisition and improvement of the agricultural land sold by the assessee at ₹ 12,02,592/- as claimed by the assessee. Thus Ground of the assessee is allowed. Deduction u/s 54 in respect of purchase of agricultural land - revenue not allowed this claim for the reason that the sale deed of the agricultural land under consideration was registered on 03-08-2010 and therefore, the agricultural land purchased prior to the execution of sale deed is not entitled for deduction u/s 54B - Held that:- In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sanjeev Lal vs. CIT [2014 (7) TMI 99 - SUPREME COURT ] and Subhash Vinayak Supnekar [2017 (1) TMI 58 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] wherein it was held that where the investment in purchase of residential house or investment in bond is out of the amount received on agreement to sale, the deduction should be allowed even if the sale deed is registered subsequently. However, find that the assessee has only 1/7th share in the agricultural land sold and therefore, to ascertain the availability of the amount with the assessee to purchase the agricultural land of ₹ 5,20,050/-, the issue is set aside to the file of the AO with the direction to allow the deduction u/s 54B in respect of the purchase of this agricultural land to the extent of availability of the funds with the assessee. Ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
|