SHUSHILA DEVI,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(5), GURGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer to verify the assessment status of co-owners and to inquire from the sister-in-law about the purchase of agricultural land by the deceased brother using the assessee's sale consideration. If confirmed, the AO is to allow exemption under Section 54.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an illiterate villager, inherited agricultural land which was sold by her family. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to her income as long-term capital gains and agricultural income for rate purposes. The assessee claimed she gave her share of the sale proceeds to her deceased brother.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption under Section 54 for capital gains on agricultural land, and the AO's method of determining fair market value for capital gains calculation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘B’ BENCH,
Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & MS ASTHA CHANDRA
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Faridabad dated 31.03.2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15.
The grievances of the assessee read as under:
“1. That the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in passing the assessment order making a substantive addition of Rs.30184566/- as long term capital gains and addition of Rs. 30430210/- as agricultural income for rate purposes to the income of the assessee without proper application of mind and Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the said addition in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. That the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in passing an invalid, arbitrary and unreasonable assessment order making a substantive addition of Rs.30184566/- and addition of Rs. 30430210/- as agricultural income for rate purposes to the income of the assessee and Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the assessment made by Ld. AO in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3. That the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in making and Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the substantive addition of Rs.30184566/- as LTCG by adopting miniscule market value as on 01.04.1981 of land sold by the appeilant in the facts and circumstances of the case. That the Ld. AO and CIT(A) erred in not determining Fair Market Value of the land as on 01.04..1981 in accordance with evolved principles for the valuation in the absence of any award (compensation on acquisition by Govt.) in respect of agricultural land in village where the appellant's Land was located.
4. That the Ld. AO erred in law and on facts in making and Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.30184566/- as LTCG by adopting market value of land under consideration as on 01.04.1981 on the basis of non comparable instances of Awards (compensation on acquisition by Govt.) in respect of lands located in distant villages whereas the land sold by the appellant was located in the Village of Daulatpur, Teh: Kapashera, Distt: South West Delhi and was better located. That the distance between the two lands was about 38 Kms, land of the appellant was better located and they were not at all comparable in value. The Ld. AO and CIT(A) should have taken the Fair Market Value of some similarly located land in the vicinity.
5. That the Ld. AO and CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in not following the principles of natural justice as per settled law in the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. Without prejudice to above, the Ld. AO and CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not considering the case of the assessee for entitlement to deduction u/s 54 of the Income Tax Act.
The appellant craves leave to amend or alter all or any of the aforesaid grounds of ~ and amend, alter or add any other ground of appeal.”
The peculiar facts of the case are that the assessee is an illiterate villager, who appeared in person before us and tried to explain the impugned facts, from which we gather that the assessee along with other family members, inherited some agricultural land in village Daulatpur, New Delhi, in which the assessee had 1/5th share. The total land area was 16 Bigas, 7 Biswas and 10 Biswani which was sold for Rs. 15,21,51,042/- by five family members.
Return of the assessee was selected for scrutiny through CASS and on finding that the said agricultural land is situated within the limits of Municipal Corporation Delhi, sale is exigible to capital gain tax and accordingly, the assessee was asked to furnish documentary evidence for the value of land as on 01.04.1981, which has been sold on 11.09.2013.
The illiterate lady could not explain nor attend the proceedings.
The Assessing Officer computed the capital gains in respect of the entire land holding and added 1/5th share of the assessee amounting to Rs. 3,01,84,566/– along with interest earned on savings account Rs. 29,907/–.
Appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) but without any success.
We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below and tried our best to understand from the assessee herself who was present before us. What we understand is that the family sold the impugned land. Being the daughter of the family, the assessee also received 1/5th share, but out of sheer love and affection, she gave her share to her brother Shri Shamsher. The fact of payment of Rs. 2.49 crores to Shri Shamsher has also been mentioned by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order.
Rs. 47 lakhs was given to Anshu. The lady says that her brother has since deceased and, therefore, she has no evidence with her, as her sister-in-law does not allow her to enter the house. Although the Assessing Officer has mentioned the names of all the co-owners and has computed the capital gains on the total land holding and attributed 1/5th share to the assessee, but nowhere he has mentioned the status of assessment in the hands of the co-owners.
The appellant lady before us stated that her brother has purchased some agricultural land out of the consideration given by her but showed her inability to furnish documents as the same are available with her sister-in-law who does not allow her to enter into the house.
On such peculiar facts of the case, bank account of the assessee has been freezed by the officers, making her life more miserable. We do not want the illiterate lady to suffer in the hands of the revenue but at the same time we also feel helpless as we cannot do anything for this illiterate lady.
In the interest of justice and humanity, we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the status of the assessment/appeal of the co-owners as mentioned by him in his assessment order. The Assessing Officer is also directed to verify from the sister in law [wife of the deceased brother of the assessee] whether the deceased had purchased agricultural land out of consideration received from the assessee, Smt. Sushila Devi.
The Assessing Officer must exercise all his powers to get information from that lady and if he finds that the brother had purchased agricultural land from the sale consideration given by the assessee, then allow claim of exemption u/s 54 of the Act and decide the issue fresh as per provisions of law and as far as possible/practical, be sympathetic to the assesses.
In the result the appeal of the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 06.12.2023.
More judgments on Section 54
- Renu Arun Talwar, Mumbai vs Circle 17(1), MumbaiITA 204/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(3)(2), Ahmedabad vs Manan Arati Patel, AhmedabadITA 923/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Rohitbhai Jivrambhai Patel, Vadodara vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward 3(1)(2), VadodaraITA 679/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Dy. Commissioner of Income… vs Thomas Myladiyil Augustine, AhmedabadITA 1131/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- 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
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026