TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings, wherein the assessee stated to have sold the mine, allotted to him in the year 1988-89, in the year under consideration, for a sum of ₹ 1.5 lakhs, to M/s. Kothari Marble Industries, Pasoond, and the revenue also challenged the deletion of ₹ 50,000, added on account of unexplained investment in the acquisition of mines at Nijarana, which was deleted on the ground, that the assessee had ₹ 1.5 lakhs with him for such an expenditure, in the absence of any proof on record to show, that the assessee had spent this amount anywhere else. 2. The appeal was admitted by framing two substantial questions of law, on 23-5-2006, reading as under :- (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ine, as a capital asset. The learned Tribunal has held, that the mines are definitely the property of the Government, and allotment is made for mining purposes. The right to leasehold vested in the assessee, and the disputed amount was received by the assessee, on the transfer of the leasehold right of the mining. Then it has been found, that the provisions of capital gains were not in vogue during the relevant period. It was found, that the receipt is definitely a capital receipt, on capital asset, but in the absence of such provisions at the relevant time, this was not possible to be taxed, because these provisions came into existence only with effect from 1-4-1998, and therefore, the deletion was upheld. 5. It was contended by the lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasonings are decipherable as above. This is one aspect of the matter. 7. The other aspect of the matter is, as fairly pointed out by the learned counsel for the revenue, by showing us the judgment of this Court, in CIT v. Gotan Lime Stone Khanij Udhyog [2006] 269 ITR 399, which in turn considered all previous judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, so also the Courts of England and Scotland, and held, that the consideration received in the circumstances like the present one, is not includible in the taxable income, as 'capital gain'. 8. In our view, even without going into the aspect about existence of the provisions of taxability of 'capital gain' in the year 1993-94, in view of the judgment of this Court, in Go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
