Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2003 (1) TMI 49

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... icer, the assessee had claimed that it was agricultural land and so the capital gains arising on the transfer were not liable to tax under the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer did not accept that claim and he prepared to make the assessment of the capital gains at Rs. 13,33,987. In the assessee's appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the capital gains arising on the transfer of the land constituted income within the meaning of section 2(14) of the Act and so it was rightly brought to tax. Another contention that the assessee had raised before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was that the capital gains, if at all taxable, were to be assessed for the assessment year 1987-88 and not for the assessment year 19 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... though Thrikkakara is not appearing in the second notification No. 9447/F issued on January 6, 1994?" We heard learned counsel for the assessee and learned counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the assessee argued that the land vested in the Government under the Land Acquisition Act only after the award is passed. The award in this case was passed not in the assessment year 1985-86, but in the assessment year 1986-87. The question for consideration is when the property vested in the Government. An extent of land measuring 2.7929 hectares and situated in Thrikkakara South Village in Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam District, was acquired by the Government. The Government accorded sanction to invoke the urgency clause. Notification under .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e for, urbanisation of that area and other relevant considerations, specified in this behalf by notification. So far as the Land Acquisition Act is concerned, there are two methods for acquisition; one is by the ordinary mode and the other is by resorting to the urgency clause. In the ordinary mode, the notification is issued under section 4 whereby it is made known that a certain land is likely to be acquired for a public purpose. An opportunity was given to the owner of the land to file his objection to the acquisition. After considering the objections, if the Government wants to go ahead with the acquisition, then a declaration is issued under section 6. Thereafter, an award enquiry is conducted. The award is passed under section 11 of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rances. Thus, so far as the urgency clause is concerned, possession can be taken after section 9 notice and such land shall vest in the Government. In the ordinary mode, possession is taken only after the award is passed. The contention of learned counsel for the assessee is that the possession is not taken under the Land Acquisition Act and, hence, in this case the crucial date taken is when the award was passed. We do not agree with the contention of learned counsel for the assessee. Even under both clauses vesting takes place only after the possession is taken. Taking possession earlier cannot be taken advantage. A similar contention arose in the decision reported in Kerala State Housing Board v. Ammalukutty [1983] KLT 112. In that case .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ounsel for the assessee is that since the notification deleted the Thrikkakara Panchayat, which came into force during the pendency of the appeal, it can be taken note of and if that be so, the compensation will not amount to capital assets. According to us, this argument cannot be accepted. Normally, the proceedings are to be completed on the basis of law that was existing at that time. Learned counsel for the assessee cited certain decisions before us. But according to us, those decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case. In Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P. Singh, fourth edition, at page 280, it is stated thus: "Fiscal legislation imposing liability is generally governed by the normal presumption .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates