9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 670X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has come up in appeal. The facts and circumstances of the case, briefly stated, are as follows: The assessee was a partner of the firm carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. D.K. Roy & Brothers. He took over the business of the partnership together with assets and liabilities with effect from 1st April, 2001. He sold the assets during the financial year 2005- 06 which is the relevant previous year. He claimed the benefit of capital gains under section 54EC of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The learned Tribunal by the impugned judgment has allowed the aforesaid claim. The contention of the Revenue was that the benefit under section 54EC of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on record wherein the applicability of the provision of section 54EC read with sections 50 and 48 of the I.T. Act was held in favour of the assessee in so far as it was undisputed the transfer was of long term capital assets, the exemption u/s 54EC is available and the assets on which depreciation is allowed have been owned and used by the assessee for claiming depreciation therefore holding them as for short term capital gain would be done as provided u/s 50 of the Act by applying the provisions of section 48 and 49 and would not disentitle the same from availability of the said examination. For this proposition the Hon'ble High Court relied on CBDT Circular No.469 dated 23rd September, 1986 and was also considered by the ITAT Mumbai Ben ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said fact, we find that this appeal has been filed by violating the instruction issued by the CBDT, which was binding upon the appellant in view of the provisions contained in Section 268A of the Income Tax Act, 1968. We, thus, dismiss this appeal on that ground alone." Ms. Gutgutia, learned Advocate appearing for the Revenue has not disputed the fact that the tax effect is less than Rs.10 lakhs and, therefore, the Instruction dated 9th February, 2011 issued by the CBDT is applicable. In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed on that ground alone. In view of the dismissal of the appeal itself, the connected application has become infructuous and the same is also disposed of accordingly. We record our deep sense of appreciation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
