During the year, the assessee sold land measuring 1.425 hectares. On about 8800 sq. ft. of this land, a rice mill was located.assessee submitted that the total sale price was of Rs. 90 lakhs, out of which, sale of agricultural land was of Rs. 71,25,056/-, sale of building was of Rs. 18,74,944/- and sale of machinery was of Rs. 5 lakhs. Reducing the WDV of the building and the machinery, amounting to Rs. 8,59,467/-, the assessee stated net short term capital gain of Rs. 15,15,467/-.
Assessing Officer observed that when the land had been used for rice mill plant, the nature of the land obviously had got changed; that the building, godown and plant & machinery existed on the land; that no agricultural activity stood carried out on the land; and that the land was a capital asset, transfer whereof was liable to tax. The Assessing Officer calculated the long term capital gain at Rs. 62,76,446/- and the short term capital gain at Rs. 20,90,544/-.
the land is agricultural land, as depicted in the revenue records. No contrary decision has been cited before us. It is only the land beneath the rice mill, measuring 8800 sq. ft., on which long term capital gain is exigible. The contention of the assessee, regarding land of 700 sq. ft. covering his residence, has been brought up only at the present stage. It did not see the light of day at any earlier stage before any of the authorities below, nor is any evidence with regard thereto forthcoming. Therefore, this claim is not available to the assessee.
Sec. 2(14) of Income Tax Act, 1961— Capital Gain – The assessee challenged the order of CIT(A) in upholding Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of Agriculture Land without appreciating that the Agriculture Land is not an asset u/s 2(14) of I. T. Act. In the present case, the land is agricultural land, as depicted in the revenue records. It is only the land beneath the rice mill, measuring 8800 sq. ft., on which long term capital gain is exigible. The contention of the assessee, regarding land of 700 sq. ft. covering his residence, has been brought up only at the appellate stage before Tribunal. It did not see the light of day at any earlier stage before any of the authorities below, nor is any evidence with regard thereto forthcoming. Therefore, this claim is not available to the assessee. Thus, the long term capital gain is, directed to be calculated and levied in the order. Appeal of the assessee partly allowed. - HARVINDER KUMAR SAHNI V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2020] 23 ITCD Online 124 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
During the year, the assessee sold land measuring 1.425 hectares. On about 8800 sq. ft. of this land, a rice mill was located.assessee submitted that the total sale price was of Rs. 90 lakhs, out of which, sale of agricultural land was of Rs. 71,25,056/-, sale of building was of Rs. 18,74,944/- and sale of machinery was of Rs. 5 lakhs. Reducing the WDV of the building and the machinery, amounting to Rs. 8,59,467/-, the assessee stated net short term capital gain of Rs. 15,15,467/-.
Assessing Officer observed that when the land had been used for rice mill plant, the nature of the land obviously had got changed; that the building, godown and plant & machinery existed on the land; that no agricultural activity stood carried out on the land; and that the land was a capital asset, transfer whereof was liable to tax. The Assessing Officer calculated the long term capital gain at Rs. 62,76,446/- and the short term capital gain at Rs. 20,90,544/-.
the land is agricultural land, as depicted in the revenue records. No contrary decision has been cited before us. It is only the land beneath the rice mill, measuring 8800 sq. ft., on which long term capital gain is exigible. The contention of the assessee, regarding land of 700 sq. ft. covering his residence, has been brought up only at the present stage. It did not see the light of day at any earlier stage before any of the authorities below, nor is any evidence with regard thereto forthcoming. Therefore, this claim is not available to the assessee.
Sec. 2(14) of Income Tax Act, 1961— Capital Gain – The assessee challenged the order of CIT(A) in upholding Long Term Capital Gain on Sale of Agriculture Land without appreciating that the Agriculture Land is not an asset u/s 2(14) of I. T. Act. In the present case, the land is agricultural land, as depicted in the revenue records. It is only the land beneath the rice mill, measuring 8800 sq. ft., on which long term capital gain is exigible. The contention of the assessee, regarding land of 700 sq. ft. covering his residence, has been brought up only at the appellate stage before Tribunal. It did not see the light of day at any earlier stage before any of the authorities below, nor is any evidence with regard thereto forthcoming. Therefore, this claim is not available to the assessee. Thus, the long term capital gain is, directed to be calculated and levied in the order. Appeal of the assessee partly allowed. - HARVINDER KUMAR SAHNI V/s DEPUTY CIT - [2020] 23 ITCD Online 124 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)