TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith another brother sold a property which is an extent of 65 cents with building for a consideration of Rs. 3,09,000. The said property had been allotted to all the three brothers under a partition deed dated November 27, 1955. The said partition deed conferred a right of residence in the property in favour of the mother. The assessees in both the cases claimed a deduction of Rs. 60,006 which they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in the property and that could not be taken into the computation of capital gains by the assessees. Whether it is called " deduction " or not, it is only, a case of exclusion and, therefore, the said amount cannot be taken as consideration received by the assessees. In this view, the Tribunal allowed the claim of, the assessees, for deduction of Rs. 60,000 which had been admittedly paid to their ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts discussed in his order ? Common to T.C.Ps. Nos. 128 of 83 265 of 1982: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum of Rs. 60,000 paid to the mother of the assessee, Smt, Punnialakshmi Ammal, was for relinquishment of her right in the property sold and hence in computing the capital gains arising out of the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hased by getting a relinquishment for a consideration of Rs 60,000, the said sum could not be taken to be consideration paid in respect of the interest on the assessee-sons. The payment made to the sons towards their interest in the property is only Rs. 83,000 each and that alone can be taken for the purpose of computation of the capital gains. Hence the Tribunal in this case appears to be right i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
