Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. On the contrary, the DR has vehemently supported the order of the authorities below and has further submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has decided the issue against the assessee in the case of Kalya Vs. CIT & Ors. (2012) 73 DTR 302 (Raj). He has further submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has examined the issue and held that a bare reading of Section 54B of the Act does not suggest that assessee would be entitled to get exemption for the land purchased 5 ITA 333/JP/2016_ Mahadev Balai Vs ITO by him in the name of his son and daughter-in-law. She further submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has held that the word "assessee" used in the Income Tax Act needs to be given a 'legal interpretation' and not a 'liberal interpretation', as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. If the word 'assessee' is given a liberal interpretation, it would tantamount to giving a free hand to the assessee and his legal heirs and it shall curtail the revenue of the Government, which the law does not permit. Ld. DR has further submitted that the wife of the assessee would not come within the ambit of the word 'assessee' and she submitted that the authorities below have rightly decided this issue against the assessee.

"5. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the object of granting exemption under Section 54b of the Act of 1961 is that a person who sells agricultural land for the purpose of purchasing another agricultural land must be given exemption so far as capital gains are concerned. The word "assessee" used in section 54b of the Act for fulfilling the condition and subsequently enabling the assessee to claim exemption under Section 54b of the Act must be given a wide and liberal interpretation so as to include his legal heirs also. The provisions contained in Section 54b of the Act being socio-welfare and beneficial in nature were required to be construed liberally in favour of assessee, but the learned Tribunal arbitrarily disallowed the claim of the appellant-assessee and upheld the findings of the CIT (A) observing that no deduction under Section 54B of the Act would be available to the assessee-appellant on the issue of purchase of land in the name of his son and daughter-in-law, hence the impugned order needs to be set-aside.

7. A bare reading of Section 54B of the Income Tax Act does not suggest that assessee would be entitled to get exemption for the land purchased by him in the name of his son and daughter-in-law. In the facts and circumstances of the case also aforesaid inference has not been drawn. Same is question of fact. No substantial question of law arises in appeal. Question whether purchase was by assessee or by son, is a question of fact.

8. Secondly, the word "assessee" used in the Income Tax Act needs to be given a 'legal interpretation' and not a 'liberal interpretation', as contended by the learned counsel for the appellant. If the word 'assessee' is given a liberal interpretation, it would be tantamount to giving a free hand to the assessee and his legal heirs and it shall curtail the revenue of the Government, which the law does not permit.