Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Income Tax-IV Versus Edward Keventer (Successors) Private Limited

2015 (8) TMI 986 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Transfer of two properties - capital gains v/s income from business - CIT (A) concluded that the two residential bungalows sold would result only in long term capital gain also confirmed by ITAT - Held that:- It is not possible to evolve a single test or formula which can be applied in determining whether the transaction was an adventure in the nature of trade. It was also noted that in the case of purchase and sale of land, generally speaking, the original intention of the party in purchasing t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(1987 (1) TMI 12 - BOMBAY High Court )

Tribunal, as a final fact finding authority has confirmed the findings of fact returned by the CIT (A). While doing so, it did not look at any solitary fact to determine as to whether the transactions in question resulted in capital gains or in business income. Several factors were considered, which included the intention of the assessee in purchasing the property, the length of time the property was kept by the assessee (which in this case is m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated 18.11.2013 in ITA No.1242/Del/2011 pertaining to the assessment year 2006-2007. 2. The only point urged by the learned counsel for the Revenue before us was with regard to the decision of the Tribunal that the transfer of the two properties to Mr Niranjan Koirala and Ms Sheila Aggarwal was wrongly concluded by the Tribunal to result in capital gains and not income f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he learned counsel for the Revenue, the two properties which are sold to Mr Niranjan Koirala and Ms Sheila Aggarwal, respectively, were also part of the Memorandum of Understanding. However, according to the learned counsel for the assessee, both these properties, which are the subject matter of the present appeal, were excluded from the Memorandum of Understanding for development of the properties. Anyhow, the said Memorandum of Understanding was cancelled on 08.06.2005 and the development of l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ch a residential bungalow and an outhouse were constructed. The property, which was transferred to Ms Aggarwal, comprised of 9090 sq. yds upon which a residential bungalow and an outhouse were constructed. The property transferred to Mr Niranjan Koirala carried a sale consideration of ₹ 10.51 crores and the sale consideration in respect of the transfer to Ms Sheila Aggarwal was ₹ 35.1 crores. 4. The only issue, that is raised before us, is whether the said transactions of transfer of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

presented before him, and also facts of the case, came to the conclusion that the intention of the assessee, at the time of purchase of the property in 1952 was to establish a dairy farm in which it would produce milk. The said property was held as an asset and shown as a fixed asset in the books of the assessee from 1952 onwards. The CIT (A) also observed that no contrary fact had been brought on record by the Assessing Officer and that successive assessments from the date of purchase of the l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that the two residential bungalows sold on 27.05.2005 to the existing occupiers of the same by the assessee, would result only in long term capital gain and not in any income under the head of business. 5. The Revenue, being aggrieved by these findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, which confirmed the findings of the CIT (A), by virtue of the impugned order dated 18.11.2013. 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he property, the magnitude of the transaction of purchase, the nature of the property, the length of its ownership and holding, the conduct and subsequent dealing of the assessee in respect of the property, the manner of its disposal and the frequency and multiplicity of transactions, afford valuable guides in determining whether the assessee is carrying on a trading activity and whether a particular transaction should be stamped with the character of a trading adventure. 7. We are in agreement .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version