Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 42 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment - addition on account of Long Term Capital Gain - scope of Section 55A of the Act regarding reference to DVO in case of cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 - land was purchased by assessee in the name of his son as co-owner - Held that:- For the assessment year 2009-10 in assessee’s group concern this issue was observed in detailed and it was held by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal that the applicability of amendment so far as Section 55A is concerned, it cannot be applicable retrospectively. Exemption/s.54B - assessee was not allowed by the Revenue Authorities. Since the land was purchased in the name of the assessee’s son - whether exemption/s.54B of the Act can be allowed even if the new agricultural land is purchased in the name of family members? - Held that:- Out of sale proceeds of the said sale, the assessee has purchased other piece of land in his name and in the name of his only son who was bachelor and was dependent upon him, for being used for agricultural purposes within the stipulated time. Further it was not the case of the Revenue that from the sale proceeds of the agricultural land earlier owned by the assessee, the land in question was purchased for any other purpose than the agricultural purpose. The purchased land was being used by the assessee for agricultural purpose and merely because in the sale deed his only son was also shown as co-owner, the Hon'ble ITAT has rightly come to the conclusion that it does not make any difference because the purchased land is being used by the assessee for agricultural purposes. On the other hand, Ld. DR did not bring out any evidence on record to demonstrate that the said land of the assessee was used for any other purpose other than agricultural purpose. The Assessing Officer referred to the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Prakash Vs. ITO [2008 (9) TMI 234 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] but the facts are substantially different from the case of the assessee in hand. Further, we have also considered the decision in the case of CIT Vs. Vegetables Products Ltd. [1973 (1) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT], therein the view also favorable to the assessee that has to be taken, in case of conflicting opinions. - Decided in favour of assessee
|