SANJEEV KUMAR AGRAWAL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

The Ld. AR submitted that during the year the assessee had sold two agricultural land. One agricultural land was beyond 9KM from municipal limit and another agricultural land was beyond 25KM of municipal limit. Ld. AR submitted that since the assessee has sold agricultural land it is not a capital asset hence; no capital gain can be taxed. Ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Maltibai R. Kadu v. State of Maharashtra passed on 18.03.2026 wherein the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that prior to AY 2014-15 the distance should be road distance and not ariel distance. Ld. AR also filed a copy of the google map to demonstrate the distance of the land.

Ld. DR submitted that as per Ld. CIT(A) copy of the register sale deed was not filed. He further relied on the order of the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A).

We have heard both parties and perused the records. In this case, Ld. CIT(A) at page 13 has recorded following findings: “Upon careful examination of the record, I find that the appellant has failed to produce the crucial documents like certified copy of sale deeds showing description of the lands as agricultural lands, purchase deed or title documents establishing ownership and nature of lands…”

During the proceedings, we brought to the notice of Ld. AR that as per Ld. CIT(A) copy of sale deed were not submitted. However, Ld. AR invited out attention to the e-acknowledgment to demonstrate that copy of sale deed were submitted. It is also observed that the Ld. AR has filed copy of the google map to demonstrate the distance which was not filed before the Ld. CIT(A). In these facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) to Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The assessee shall file all the details before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) shall provide proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and also consider the details filed before him. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.