Assessee, a non-resident, sold a land with a residential building situated in a village for a certain sum and claimed exemption under section 10(37) on ground that it was agricultural land having no liability to capital gains tax. Assessing Officer rejected said claim, which was affirmed by the Tribunal. High Court affirmed the order of the Tribunal. As regards the exemption under section 54F of the Act, even if claim was not made in return,the Assessing Officer cannot reject the claim on technical ground. Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer. (AY. 2014-15)
George Stanley v. DCIT (IT) (2025) 178 taxmann.com 187 / 347 CTR 299 / 255 DTR 57 (Ker)(HC)
S.54F : Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Agricultural land-Capital asset-Even if claim was not made in return-The Assessing Officer cannot reject the claim on technical ground-Matter remanded-Assessee had not adduced any evidence to prove agricultural activity and documents of Sub-Registrar’s office where sale deed was registered did not contain any endorsement as regards nature of property to be agricultural-Denial of exemption affirmed. [S. 2(14), 10 (37), 45, 260A]
Leave a Reply