The assessee purchased agricultural land in the name of his wife and claimed exemption against the capital gains earned by him on sale of his urban agricultural land.  However, the AO denied the exemption to the assessee for the reason that the legislature had not intended to advance the benefit of the said section to an assessee who purchases agricultural land in the name of a third person. The CIT(A) upheld the view taken by the AO. The Tribunal, by following the judgments in the case of Kamal Kant Kamboj v. ITO [2017] 88 taxmann.com 541/397 ITR 240 (Punj. & Har.)(HC)  Jai Narain v. ITO [2008] 306 ITR 335 (Punj. & Har.)(HC)  and CIT v. Dinesh Verma [2015] 60 taxmann.com 461/233 Taxman 409 (Punj. & Har.)(HC)  confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A). (AY. 2012-13)