VISHWAMBHAR CHAUDHARI,KATIHAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), KATIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

capital gains on presumption and surmises. The case of the\nassessee has not been considered in proper perspective. The assessee duly\napprised to the department that the property sold was agricultural land and any\ngains on the same was exempt under provision of section 10(37) of the L. T. Act,\n1961. Before the department the assessee duly filed copy

ITO, WARD-4(1), PATNA vs. JAGDISH RAY, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of revenue-ITA No

10(37) in the act from 01.04.2005 to provide specific' exemption to the capital gains arising to an individual or HUF from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land situated in specified urban limit, subject to fulfillment of certain conditions. Therefore, compensation received from compulsory acquisition of an agricultural land is no taxable under the Act (Subject to fulfillment of certain

ASHA DEVI L/H OF LATE GYAN CHAND PRASAD,PATNA vs. PR.CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

46(1). The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ("New Act of 2013") came into force from January, 2014 repealing the erstwhile Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ("LA Act 1894"). Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. Retrospective Application: Provisions under the 2013 Act Section 24(1) of the 2013 Act provides that

MANOJ KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO WARD 4(4), PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

section 46 of the RFCTLARR Act says otherwise but the assessee unable to produce the requisite documents to justify the exemption as claimed by the assessee in his submission and grounds of appeal taken to the assessee. The ld. Counsel is also unable to demonstrate that the circular issued by the CBDT noted supra is squarely applicable 9. Considering

KIRAN JAISWAL,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 4(5), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

capital gain merely on the ground that the appellant has sold land for Rs.31,25,000 the estimated cost of acquisition whereof would be Rs.2,46,000 notwithstanding the fact that the whole of the sale proceeds were invested in purchase of land and construction of residential house there on and that the same were specifically exempt under Section