TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion has been referred under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (in short, "the Tribunal"): "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in rejecting the assessee's claim for exemption under section 54 of the Income-tax Act,'1961, and in hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s entitled-to exemption from the tax for capital gain amounting to Rs. 92,446..The cost of construction, in addition to the cost of land, was stated to be Rs. 30,000. The Income-tax Officer rejected the said claim on the ground that there was no evidence of user as residence. Reliance was placed on a statement dated january 28, 1974, wherein the assessee had himself stated that the building was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the assessee submitted that, in view of the conclusions of the Tribunal, that servant quarters had been constructed, the further conclusion that, keeping in view the assessee's status, it cannot be said that the house was being used for the purpose of residence cannot be maintained. It was further submitted that what was necessary for claiming exemption related to user of the property for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there was actually no occupation by any servant or tenant and even there was no cooking. In view of the accepted statement of the assessee that the building was not worth occupying and was not inhabitable, the conclusion that the assessee was not entitled to the exemption is in order. The question is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. This re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
