TMI Blog1993 (2) TMI 3X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - Dated:- 18-2-1993 - B. P. JEEVAN REDDY. and N. VENKATACHALA. JUDGMENT The assessees are the appellants. They are aggrieved by the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court answering the question referred to it under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, at the instance of the Revenue, against them. The two questions referred read as follows : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nto, one in May, 1964, and the other in July, 1964, and sale deeds were executed in pursuance thereof on October 9, 1964, and November 13, 1964. The total consideration received under the sale deeds was Rs. 52,285. The Income-tax Officer brought the difference amount to tax treating the transaction as an adventure in the nature of trade. The assessees questioned the same by way of an appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... land, was to re-sell the same and not to make an investment. It is the said conclusion which is questioned before us. On the facts found, we cannot say that the High Court was in error in coming to the conclusion it did. On the other hand, the Tribunal seems to have made certain assumptions while coming to the conclusion in favour of the assessees, which were not really warranted. The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
