TMI Blog1994 (5) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ered firm having been brought into existence with the object of dealing in land and properties, constructing properties, getting constructed flats and blocks shops etc., and of estate brokers. Accordingly, it entered into an agreement to purchase a property in its first year i.e., 1974-75 assessment year (S.Y. 2029) and incurred expenditure on land survey on obtaining copies of field book, in preparing perspective and several other items aggregating to Rs. 1,453 during that year. In the next year, it further incurred expenditure in payment of Rs. 9,006 to architect for preparing plans and other expenses for making the application for steel, etc. Preparing sign-board for new premises and other small items aggregating to Rs. 10,924. The appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttacked the order of the CIT (A) on two grounds. Firstly, it was stated that the receipt was not income at all because in absence of business having been carried on, there cannot be any income by way of business. Secondly it was stated that the receipts was in the nature of capital gain and, therefore, it should have been treated as exempt on the basis of Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT vs. B.C,. Srinivasa Setty (1981) 21 CTR (SC) 138 : (1981) 128 ITR 294 (SC). Reliance was also placed on the decisions of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hiralal Manilal Mody (1981) 25 CTR (Guj) 275 : (1981) 131 ITR 421 (Guj) and Bombay High Court in the case of Rattanchand Hirachand vs. CIT (1960) 38 ITR 76 (Bom) and Delhi High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 7. We have considered the submission and materials to which our attention was drawn. It is an admitted fact that partnership was formed with the soled intention of dealing in properties. This being an undisputed basis, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the CIT(A) we therefore, uphold his order in toto. We would further add the following para. 8. It is seen on the copies of the assessment orders that not only the income was returned as business income, but the firm has been granted registration u/ss 184 and 185 of the Act. Therefore, very fact of claiming of benefit of registration controvert the submission of the ld. Counsel that the Satakat was intended only for the purp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase of Hrialal Manilal, the Gujarat High Court was concerned with interpretation of an agreement for purchase of property so as to determine whether the assessee was a dealer in immovable property or not. It was held by their Lordships of the Gujarat High Court that ordinarily when a person purchases immovable property it is treated as an investment and it is only in rare cases that purchase and sale of immovable property is treated as a business or adventure in the nature of trade and in such cases the burden of proving that the particular transaction was adventure in the nature of is on the Revenue. The facts under appeal wholly support the stand of the Revenue and in fact reliance was against the assessee. 9. In the result, the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
