Shaik Afsar Hussain Vs ITO (ITAT Hyderabad)
Agricultural Land vs Capital Asset Issue Remanded – Proper Verification of Sec. 2(14) Criteria Directed – ITAT Hyderabad
ITAT set aside the addition of ₹53.97 lakh towards long-term capital gains arising from sale of land, holding that lower authorities failed to properly examine whether the land constituted a “capital asset” under sec.2(14). The assessee contended that the land was rural agricultural land situated beyond municipal limits, while Revenue argued that it fell within urban jurisdiction. Tribunal observed that neither AO nor CIT(A) verified key factual aspects such as exact location, municipal distance, population criteria and applicability of relevant government notifications in force at the time of transfer.
Since determination of rural vs urban agricultural land requires detailed factual verification, the matter was restored to AO for de novo examination after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. Appeal allowed for statistical purposes
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT HYDERABAD
This appeal is filed by Shri Shaik Afsar Hussain, (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 29/06/2024 for the A.Y.2011-12.
2. At the outset, it is noticed that there is a delay of 106 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. In support of the prayer for condonation of delay, the assessee has filed a petition along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. In this regard, the Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen aged about 71 years, an elderly person with no specialised knowledge of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). It was submitted that due to lack of proper guidance and legal assistance, the assessee was unable to file the appeal within the prescribed time. During the relevant period, the assessee was making efforts to engage a suitable counsel, met several counsels, and ultimately succeeded in engaging one, whereafter the present appeal came to be filed. It was submitted that the delay was thus occasioned due to bona fide reasons and circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, and there was neither any deliberate lapse nor any intention to delay the filing of the appeal. Accordingly, it was prayed that the delay may be condoned in the interest of justice and the appeal be admitted for adjudication on merits.
