TMI Blog1982 (4) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ally transferred through a registration deed on 22nd July, 1974. As per the original agreement, the purchase consideration was agreed at Rs. 2,20,000. But since there was increase in the value of land, between the period from 23rd Jan, 1971 to the date of registration, i.e. 22nd July, 1974, the purchase offered was sold for a sum of Rs. 2,65,000. The excess amount was capital gains. As against this order of the ITO the assessee went in appeal before the AAC, before whom the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in terms of s. 2(14)(iii)(b) agricultural land is not a capital asset because the land was situated beyond one kilometre as required vide Notification No. S.O. 77(6), dt. 6th Feb., 1973. It was further submitted that necessary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n view of the decision reported in (1981)22 CTR(Bom)41 in the case of Manubhai Ors. The ld. D. R. on the other hand contended before us that the decision relied upon by the assessee is distinguishable on the facts and further contended that when a portion of the land owned by the assessee falls within the mischief of subs-s (14) of s. 2 of cl. (iii) of sub-s. (b) read with Notification No. S.O. 77(6),dt. 6th Feb 1973, the entire land should be taken as a capital asset and the sale of such land as a capital asset and the sale of such land is liable to be charged for capital gains. 3. We have carefully considered the submissions made on behalf of both the sides. In the said case, relied on by the assessee, their Lordships of the Bombay Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Notification, fell within the definition of capital asset, thus charged the same to the capital gains tax. Since the aforesaid land is admittedly an agricultural land, the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case will apply to the facts of this case and we hold that the sale proceeds of the land question cannot to be charged to capital gains. Even on merits on perusal of the notification and from the language used in the notification, it is quite clear that if at all any area falls within the mischief of the said notification, it would be only 1.9 acres as contended by the ld. counsel for the assessee. The intention of the legislature is clear that only lands which were fit for organisation can fall within the mischief of the said notification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
