TMI Blog1981 (8) TMI 136X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d entered into an agreement dt. 4th April, 1966 with John Thomas, an advocate. That agreement stated that there was a possibility of the acquisition proceedings being dropped and that in that even the property will be sold to john Thomas for Rs. 10,00,000 subject to payment of certain outstanding liabilities on the property. The agreement also started that in the event of the property being acquired the assessee will get only a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 and John Thomas would be entitled for the balance of compensation from the government. On 7th July, 1966 the assessee gave a letter to the land acquisition Officer standing that out of the compensation for the property acquired by the government a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 may be paid to her and the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been taken as a consideration for the transfer of property to the government in the land acquisition proceedings, for the purpose of imposing capital gains. The WTO re-opened the assessment for the asst. yr. 1967-68 to 19722-73 under s. 17(1)(a) and sought to add sum of 4 lakhs received by the assessee. On appeal, the CIT(A) held that the amount of Rs. 4,00,000 accrued to the assessee only when the suit were compromised on 22nd Dec., 1975 and therefore, the reassessments for adding these amounts was unwarranted. He also deleted the addition of this amount for the later two years. 3. The revenue is in appeal to contend that because of the failure of the assessee to disclose the litigation with John Thomas as well as the fact that when she ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te any new right. In this case, the assessee has right to receive compensation for the land acquired. At one stage the assessee had agreed for receiving Rs. 10 lakhs giving up the balance. Later on 16th Sept., 1969, the assessee made a claim against John Thomas for rending an account for balance of compensation on the footings that he received it on her behalf. On the basis of the plaint there existed right asserted by the assessee which is an asset. Even thought John Thomas resisted the suit, it is significant that both the assessee and John Thomas claimed that the agreement dt 4th April, 1966 between them had been substituted and was not binding on them. The existence of the asset as well as that fact that the earlier agreement on the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
