TMI Blog1991 (10) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of old worn out rubber trees and fixed the capital gain at ₹ 15,000. In appeal the CIT (A) held that the value is little more, but there was no capital gain or capital loss. In second appeal, the Tribunal held that there is a capital gain of at least ₹ 15 per tree. The transfer of 6,500 trees took place during the relevant accounting year and so the entire sum of ₹ 2,27,500 should be considered for levy of capital gains tax during the relevant assessment year. Since the ITO considered capital gains in the sum of ₹ 35,000 only and the CIT (A) held that the entire sale proceeds had to be considered for this year, the matter requires an enhancement notice by the CIT (A), which was not done, on the ground that no capita ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s correct in view of the fact that the High Court has not said anything about the value of further yield to be taken into consideration of the market value since that issue is left open in the judgment. (e) Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case, is it correct to say that the sale has been completed on the day when the agreement was entered into between the parities, viz., 1977 or whether the sale has taken place after the complete payment was made on 15th Dec., 1979 as evidenced form cl. 4 of the agreement entered into by the assessee company and the purchaser, Mr. Jose, S/o Chacko. 2. The Tribunal, by order dt. 29th Sept., 1989, dismissed the petition. Thereafter the assessee has filed this O. P. and has prayed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 years old ? (f) Whether the decision reported in ITR 111 and 49 of 1981 by Kerala High Court is applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case, since this was not an issue in that case and the value has been accepted by both the parties in the above ITR 111 and 49 of 1981. (g) Whether, in the case, reliance made by the Tribunal in ITR 111 and 49 of 1981 of the Kerala High Court judgment is correct in view of the fact that the High Court has not said anything about the value of future yield to be taken into consideration of the market value since that issue is left open in the judgment. (h) Whether on the facts and circumstances of this case, is it correct to say that the sale has been completed on the day when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the intention of the parties. Admittedly, there was an agreement, entered into between the parties, which would decide the issue. That is not a part of the paper book before us and we are not in a position to advert to the nature of the agreement, entered into between the parties and as to when the sale has taken place according to the intention of parties. No material is placed before us to decide whether question No.(e) mentioned in paragraph 8 of the O. P. is a referable question of law. So the five questions formulated as questions (a) to (e) in paragraph 8 of the O. P., which alone were specified in the application filed before the Tribunal under s. 256 (1) of the Act, are not referable question of law. We dismiss the O. P. No. cost ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
