What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the issue is squarely covered by a previous decision of a Coordinate Bench. Following that decision, the additions made in the hands of the assessees were deleted.

The assessees sold an agricultural land purchased by 8 partners. The land was located more than 32 kilometers from Bardhaman town. The Assessing Officer (AO) and CIT(A) made additions regarding capital gains on this sale.

What were the issues?

Whether capital gains are taxable on the sale of agricultural land situated more than 32 kilometers from a municipality.

Smt. Supriya Dutta, Purba… vs I.T.O., Ward - 1(3) Now Ward… | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHANSmt. Supriya Dutta

For Appellant: Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, AR

For Respondent: Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT- Sr. DR

Hearing: 23.06.2026Pronounced: 23.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.670/Kol/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2010-11) Tushar Kanti Dutta ITO, Ward-1(3), Burdwan (now ITO, Ward-1(1), Palashan, P.O Palashan, Dist- Vs Burdwan) Purba Bardhaman, WB- 713424. (PAN: ADHPD3440M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

ITA No.671/Kol/2026 (निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2010-11) Smt. Supriya Dutta ITO, Ward-1(3), Burdwan (now ITO, Ward-1(1), Palashan, P.O Palashan, Dist- Vs Burdwan) Purba Bardhaman, WB- 713424. (PAN: AGUPD5922G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, AR Revenue by : Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT- Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2026

ORDER Per George Mathan, JM: These are two appeals filed by the assessees against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Burdwan/10120/2013-14 dated

ITA No.670&671/Kol/2026 06.05.2023 and in appeal no.CIT(A), Burdwan/10081/2015-16 dated 09.02.2024 for the assessment year 2010-11 respectively.

Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate, represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Nicholas Murmu, Addl. CIT- Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

ITA No.671/Kol/2026 filed by the assessee with a delay of 664 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay. The reasons in the affidavit are plausible and reasonable. Consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and I proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

At the time of hearing, the ld. AR has filed a chart which reads as follows:

ITA No.670&671/Kol/2026

4.1 It was submitted by the ld. AR that the issue is in regard to sale of an agricultural land situated more than 32 kilometres from Bardhaman

ITA No.670&671/Kol/2026

town purchased by 8 partners on 20.03.2007 and sold on 24.07.2009. It was the submission that this issue has come up for adjudication in the case of another partner Shri Anirban Dutta in ITA No.1527/Kol/2024 wherein the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal vide its order dated 21.04.2025 held as follows:

“6. After hearing the rival contentions of the parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the impugned land was an agriculture land which was sold by the assessee along with other partners(their respective shares) for a consideration of Rs.30 lakhs, the market value of which was Rs.53,92,034/-. Accordingly, capital gain was computed at Rs.17,47,345/- I note that the said land is located in a village which is more than 8 kilometers from the local municipality limit. I note that on the basis of certificate from the Department of Revenue, State Government of West Bengal, the land is at a distance of 32 kms from the local municipality and the land was stated to be the agricultural land. Even on the basis of English Translation of the above purchase deed in Bengali, which was done by the Interpreter of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, copy of which is placed at pages 42 to 51 of the Paper Book, I find that the said land is an agricultural land. Considering the facts, I am not inclined to restore the issue to the file of AO or to CIT(A) as a very small issue is involved in the present case and no meaningful purpose would be served by restoring the issue except the same would be involving unnecessary wastage of time, manpower of the department. In my opinion, no capital gain is attracted on the land which is more than 32 kms from the municipality of Bardhaman District. Accordingly, I set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition so made in this regard.” 4.2 It was the submission that the issue is squarely covered as the property sold is situated more than 32 kilometres from the municipality of the Bardhaman District, no capital gains is applicable in the hands of the assessee.

In reply, the ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CIT(A).

ITA No.670&671/Kol/2026 6. I have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of other partner namely Shri Anirban Dutta in ITA No.1527/Kol/2024 stated supra, respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Shri Anirban Dutta in ITA No.1527/Kol/2024 referred to supra, the additions as made in both the appeals in the hands of the assessees stand deleted.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23/06/2026.

Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER Kolkata, Dated: 23/06/2026 RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent – 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches

SMT. SUPRIYA DUTTA,PURBA BARDHAMAN vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(3) NOW WARD - 1(1),, BURDWAN

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments