HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 28 / 2014 Commissioner of Income Tax-1, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, Jaipur ----Appellant Versus Ms Pooja Agarwal, D-5A, Meera Marg, Banipark, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Archit Bohra HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Judgment 08/11/2017 1. By way of this appeal, appellant has assailed judgment and order of Tribunal whereby Tribunal has allowed appeal of assessee modifying order of CIT(A). 2. This Court while admitting matter framed following questions of law:- i) Whether in facts and circumstances of case Tribunal was justified in reversing finding of Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) and holding agricultural land as exempted under Section 2(14)(iii)(b) of Act, despite fact that said land was falling within 8 kms of municipal limit and thereby deleting addition of Rs. 6,38,40,000/- ii) Whether in facts and circumstances of case Tribunal as well as CIT(A) were justified in deleting addition of Rs. 14,30,009/- which was made by Assessing Officer by disallowing 25% of expenditure claimed by assessee as neither any (2 of 3) [ITA-28/2014] documents nor any details were submitted by assessee in support of said expenditure? 3. Taking into consideration evidence which has come on record, it seems that there are subsequent development which is required to be reconsidered by Tribunal. 4. In that view of matter, with view to verify whether distance of land in question is more than 8 kilometer on outskirts of Jaipur city is required to be re-verified by Tribunal taking into consideration, notification dt. 6 th January, 1994 issued by Income Tax Department and judgment of this Court in Tax Appeal No. 75/2014. Tribunal will consider both notification and judgment and if required make request to Revenue Authority not below Deputy Collector to verify distance from outskirts of Jaipur to land in question. 5. With above direction, matter is remitted back to Tribunal only with view to verify distance. 6. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on merits and it will be open for Tribunal to reconsider same and take independent view after taking into account new facts after verification and it will not being influenced by decision of this Court. 7. Prima facie we are of opinion, proceedings which are initiated at Calcutta pursuant to our order seems to be mis- construed by department. We take serious note about notice issued by competent authority and also lower (3 of 3) [ITA-28/2014] authority requesting higher authority u/s 263 which is also surprising to us. 8. appeal stands disposed of. (VIJAY KUMAR VYAS)J. (K.S. JHAVERI)J. A.Sharma/83 Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Jaipur v. Pooja Agarwal