SUBHASH,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-3, YAMUNANAGAR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the claim for deduction under Section 54B, despite the AO's remand report indicating eligibility for a portion of the deduction. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 54B for the purchase of agricultural land. The AO brought to tax the sale consideration of land as long-term capital gain. The CIT(A) allowed deduction under Section 54F but did not adjudicate the claim under Section 54B.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 54B for the purchase of agricultural land, and whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated this claim.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 54B,Section 54F,Section 144,Section 147,Section 2(14)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dt. 21/02/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2007-08 wherein the limited ground of appeal
taken by the assessee relates to non- grant of deduction under Section 54B of the Act.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act vide order dt. 27/02/2015 wherein the AO has brought to tax the sale consideration of the land sold at Village Kheri Rangran which falls within 8 Km. of the municipal limits of Jagadhri within the ambit of capital assets as per provisions of Section 2(14) of the Act after providing index cost of acquisition as on 01/04/1981 and determining Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG). Thereafter, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and one of the grounds raised by the assessee relates to non-grant of deduction under section 54B and 54F of the Act.
3. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee also moved an application under section 46A of the Act which was forwarded to the AO and remand report was also called and after considering the submissions of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) has returned a findings that the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 54F of the Act to the extent of expenditure incurred for the construction of the house amounting to Rs. 28,75,000/- basis fresh valuation report, certificate of Mayor, copy of electricity bill as well as the bank certificate. However, as far as claim of deduction under section 54B of the Act was concerned, no findings has been recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) and as against LTCG of Rs. 41,37,368/- determined by the AO, the Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the deduction under section 54F amounting to Rs. 28,75,000/- and the remaining LTCG of Rs. 12,52,368/- was sustained by him.
During the course of hearing, our reference was drawn to the remand report submitted by the AO wherein he has stated that the assessee is entitled to get deduction under section 54B of the Act to the extent of 1/3rd share amounting to Rs. 6,57,200/- as another agriculture land was purchased by the assessee within the stipulated period. It was submitted that the copy of the purchase deed and the remand report is very much part of the record and the claim of deduction under section 54B has not been allowed to the assessee by the ld CIT(A) even though AO in the remand report has fairly agreed that assessee is eligible for claim of deduction under section 54B of the Act.
Per contra, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the lower authorities. It was submitted that there is no findings recorded by the Ld. CIT(A) as far as claim of deduction under Section 54B of the Act and accordingly matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. The limited issue under consideration relates to claim of deduction u/s 54B of the Act which the assessee has raised before the ld CIT(A) and as so submitted by the ld AR, the AO in the remand proceedings has verified the documentation and claim so made and in his remand report has stated that the assessee is entitled to get deduction under section 54B of the Act to the extent of 1/3rd share amounting to Rs. 6,57,200/- as another agriculture land was purchased by the assessee within the stipulated period and therefore, the claim of the assessee be allowed.
More judgments on Section 54B
- Jagdishbhai Vasharambhai Italiya, Ahmedabad vs The ITO, Ward-3(1)(1), AhmedabadITA 150/AHD/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Sheela Devi, Etawah vs ITO, Ward 2(2)(5), EtawahITA 419/AGR/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Shailendra Kumar Sogani, Bhopal vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)…ITA 1076/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 640/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Nohar Yadav, Mandir Hasoud, Teh. Arang vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 1(2), Raipur…ITA 639/RPR/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mohit Jain vs. Union Bank Of INDIAMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Gopal Yadav vs. Union BankMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Infinix Inftoech vs. Utkarsh Small Fianance BankMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Chandra Shekhar Dayar vs. Hdfc BankMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026