TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 536X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt authority. No infirmity into the finding of the CIT(A) and the same is hereby affirmed. Ground of the revenue s appeal is dismissed. Allowability of deduction u/s 54B - Held that:- We find that the assessee had raised issue of recording of satisfaction by the assessing officer of the searched person as well as allowability of deduction u/s 54B of the Act. Both these grounds have not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A). We are of the view that the CIT(A) ought to have adjudicated this ground. Therefore, respectfully following the judgement in the case of CIT Vs. Tolaram Hassomal (2006 (3) TMI 136 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT) we restore both the grounds to the file of the A.O. to decide the case afresh. - IT(SS)A No.81/Ind/2015, C.O. N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6/- made by the A.O. treating the sale of agricultural land as sale of capital asset. The facts in brief are that a search seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as the Act ) was conducted on 2.5.2008 at the office premises of Rajesh Nema and at his residence. The A.O. issued a notice after case was transferred on DCIT-1 Indore dated 12.8.2010 for taking action u/s 153C of the Act. The A.O. thereafter framed assessment u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 30.12.2010. The A.O. while framing the assessment treated the sale of agricultural land as transaction in the nature of transfer of capital asset and computed long term capital gain arising there from of ₹ 1,06,00,956/- and added th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer and rejected the same on the basis of notification. The revenue has not controverted this finding by placing any contrary material. The finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is based upon the notifications issued by the competent authority. Therefore, we do not see any infirmity into the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) and the same is hereby affirmed. Ground of the revenue s appeal is dismissed. 6. Now we take up cross objection of the assessee. The assessee has raised following grounds of cross objection: i. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, Indore has rightly deleted the addition so made by the learned Assessing Officer of ₹ 1,06,00,956/- under the head L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . ACIT in ITA No.235/Ind/2016. 8. On the contrary, Ld. D.R. opposed the submissions. 9. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the assessee had raised issue of recording of satisfaction by the assessing officer of the searched person as well as allowability of deduction u/s 54B of the Act. Both these grounds have not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A). We are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have adjudicated this ground. Therefore, respectfully following the judgement of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Tolaram Hassomal 298 ITR 22 (MP) we restore both the grounds to the file of the A.O. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
