SHRI KANWAR SINGH,REWARI vs. ITO, REWARI

Since common issue is raised in all these appeals, I am, therefore, disposing of these appeals by this consolidated order, for the sake of convenience.

The only issue raised in these appeals is against the denial of deduction u/s 54B.

Briefly stated, the facts of Shri Kanwar Singh’s case are that he along with his three brothers sold their agricultural land situated in Village Qutabpur, Rewari for a consideration of Rs.52,35,000/-. The assessee’s 1/4th share in sale consideration came to Rs.13,08,750/-. While computing the ITA Nos.3370-3372/Del/2016 income, the assessee claimed the benefit u/s 54B amounting to Rs.12,11,950/-. The AO observed that the new agricultural land was purchased by the assessee in the name of his wife and, hence, the benefit was not available. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the assessment order on this issue.

I have heard the parties and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that the assessee along with his brothers sold agricultural land, income from which is otherwise chargeable to tax. The assessee claimed benefit of section 54B on the premise of purchasing another agricultural land in the name of his wife. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dinesh Verma (2015) 233 Taxmann 409 (P&H), has held, in identical circumstances, that the benefit of section 54B cannot be allowed when new property is purchased in the name of wife. In view of the binding precedent available from the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, the impugned order deserves to be upheld.

It is common submission that the facts and circumstances of the other two appeals are, mutatis mutandis, similar inasmuch as new agricultural lands were purchased by the other two assessees also in the name of their respective wives.

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed.