GURDEEP SINGH Vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The assessee has approached this Court under Sec. 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act') against the order dated 10.11.2017, Annexure A3, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench A, Chandigarh (in short, 'the Tribunal'), in ITA No.694/CHD/2017, for the assessment year 2013-14, claiming the following substantial questions of law:-

(2.) The facts as projected by the assessee in the present appeal are that he declared his dividend income of Rs. 2,000.00, agricultural income of Rs. 15 lakhs, besides the income of Rs. 1,92,870.00 from other sources for the assessment year 2013- 14. The Assessing Officer found that the property falls within 4 kilometres of the municipal limit and, therefore, vide assessment order dated 24.2.2016, Annexure A.1, he charged the sale of the land to long term capital gains tax and added Rs. 77,95,760.00 to the returned income of the assessee. The aforesaid order was subject matter of challenge before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the CIT(A)] who also dismissed the appeal vide order dated 20.3.2017, Annexure A.2. Even the further appeal before the Tribunal was also dismissed vide order dated 10.11.2017, which is subject matter of challenge before this Court.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the property sold on 16.7.2012 for consideration of Rs. 87,50,000.00 situated in village Wazidpur near Thanesar City, District Kurukshetra is agricultural land and falls out of the municipal limit. However, this fact has not been considered by the authorities below while adjudicating the controversy in dispute. Even under the provisions of Sec. 2(14) of the Act the agricultural land is excluded from the scope of definition of the capital asset.