Section 50C not applicable on sale of rights in property through POA without stamp valuation

By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the department and allowed the appeal of assessee.

2. While admitting the matter on 14-7-2016, the Court framed the following substantial questions of law: —

“1. Whether on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in holding that the municipal limits existing on the date of issue of Notification No. 9447, date 6-1-1994 under section 2(14)(iii)(b) should be considered for the purpose of determination of agricultural land instead of the municipal limits existing on the date of sale/transfer.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in holding that agriculture land sold by the assessee is not a capital asset under section 2(14) (iii)(b) as it was situated beyond 8 Kms. from the municipal limits on the date of issue of Notification No. 9447 date 6-1-1994 despite the fact that the land was undisputedly situated within 8 Kms from the municipal limit on the date of sale.”

3. Following decision was passed on 24-7-2017, in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 328/2011, CIT v. Sher Singh Sunda by this Court which reads as under:–

‘1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the department and the C.O. of the assessee is partly allowed.

2. While admitting the appeal, this court on 13-4-2012 framed the following substantial question of law:–