TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erty - tribunal found the transaction of purchase of land was in the nature of an adventure in trade and not as income in the nature of capital gains – Held that:- Authorities below rightly treated this sum as a receipt falling under Section 28(iv) of the I. T. Act - The Tribunal having clearly held that the land was in Urban Agglomeration, non agricultural user of the land was permissible - The land falls within the prescribed area of the Urban Land Ceiling Act and a plan had also been sanctioned for the proposed housing scheme under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 - The subsequent conduct of the Assessee is consistent with the intent in acquiring the rights in the property, then all the more the ITO, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g answered by this Court. In his submission, the Tribunal was considering the matter in the case of an Assessee who entered into an agreement with Mrs. Jayaben D. Kenia on 12th January 1979 for purchase of a plot of land in village Dahisar, District Bombay, for a declared consideration of ₹ 3,54,576/- and a sum of ₹ 25,000/- was paid as earnest money. The possession of the land in question was, however, not made over to the assessee. The seller/ vendor entered into another agreement with a third party on 21st December, 1979 to develop the plot. When the Assessee became aware of the same, he filed the suit and applied for interim reliefs. The vendor, as also the third party, was partydefendant to the suit. The interim application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ings of fact was rendered by the Tribunal that the Assessee had embarked upon an adventure in the nature of trade. The receipt of the decreetal amount of ₹ 35,00,000/- was nothing but an income from business, and hence, chargeable to tax. The receipt of decretal amount was not a capital gain. We have found from a reading of this order and the order passed by the Tribunal in the main Appeal, copy of which is annexed and forms part of record of this reference, that pure findings of fact were rendered and in relation to the claim of the Assessee. The legal tests that were referred to in the main order are fairly well settled and as to how this income can be treated. We do not see how the question posed for our opinion can be termed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
