2005 (6) TMI 25 - HC - Income Tax

Long-term capital gains - sale of factory along with machineries furniture - exemption under section 54E - (i) Whether Tribunal was right in upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order that the sale of factory along with machineries furniture shall be treated as long-term capital gains in spite of the fact that depreciation had been claimed on the building machinery and furniture? (ii) Whether the proviso to section 50 would be applicable in respect of depreciable assets sold along with non-depreciable assets sold in a single transaction of sale? Held that Land is not a depreciable asset. Section 50 deals only with transfer of depreciable assets. Once the land forms part of the assets of the undertaking and the transfer is of the entire undertaking as a whole it is not possible to bifurcate the sale consideration to a particular asset. Hence revenue s appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Treatment of sale of factory along with machineries and furniture as long-term capital gains.
2. Applicability of proviso to section 50 of the Act in the case of depreciable assets sold along with non-depreciable assets in a single transaction.

Analysis:
1. The appeal raised the issue of whether the Tribunal was correct in upholding the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order treating the sale of a factory along with machineries and furniture as long-term capital gains despite claiming depreciation on the assets. The case involved the sale of a bakery business, where the assessee initially claimed different gains for land and other assets. However, the Assessing Officer considered the sale as a single unit of depreciable assets, leading to short-term capital gains. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) viewed the sale as a transfer of the entire business undertaking, qualifying for long-term capital gains treatment. The Tribunal concurred with this view, emphasizing that the sale was not of a running business, but of the entire concern, and did not interfere with the Commissioner's findings.

2. The second issue pertained to the applicability of the proviso to section 50 of the Act concerning depreciable and non-depreciable assets sold together. The Department argued that separate values were assigned for movable and immovable assets in the sale, indicating individual asset transfers. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) maintained that it was a transfer of the entire business undertaking, justifying long-term capital asset treatment. The Tribunal upheld this stance, noting that the sale was not of a running business and that the intention was to sell the bakery business as a whole. The court emphasized that since the land, a non-depreciable asset, was part of the entire undertaking, section 50 of the Act, dealing with depreciable assets, did not apply. The judgments cited by the Revenue were deemed distinguishable as they involved cases where depreciable assets alone were transferred, unlike the present scenario where the entire business was sold, including non-depreciable assets like land.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the Tribunal's decision that the sale constituted long-term capital gains due to the transfer of the entire business undertaking. The court clarified that section 50 of the Act applied only to depreciable assets and not to transactions involving non-depreciable assets within the entire business transfer context. The judgments cited by the Revenue were deemed inapplicable to the current case, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.