1994 (3) TMI 5 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the receipt of shares and bonds by the assessee in an amalgamation amounts to a transfer under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
- Whether the capital gain tax is applicable on the amount received by the assessee in the form of shares and bonds.

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Gujarat involved the assessment of capital gain tax on an assessee who received shares and bonds in an amalgamation. The Income-tax Officer initially levied the tax, considering the receipt of shares as a transfer subject to capital gains tax. This decision was upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, the Tribunal, following the decision in the case of CIT v. Gautam Sarabhai Trust [1988] 173 ITR 216, held that the assessee was not entitled to benefit under section 47(vii) of the Income-tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the allotment of shares under the amalgamation scheme does not necessarily constitute a transfer of a capital asset within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Act, thereby concluding that there was no taxable capital gains in this case.

In a series of references, similar questions were raised regarding the taxability of shares and bonds received in amalgamations. The Commissioner of Income-tax relied on the decision of the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Master Raghuveer Trust [1985] 151 ITR 368, where it was held that the allotment of shares post-amalgamation does not amount to a transfer of a capital asset for consideration under section 2(47) of the Act. Additionally, the Commissioner considered the Supreme Court decision in CIT v. Rasiklal Maneklal (HUF) [1989] 177 ITR 198, which emphasized that the receipt of shares upon amalgamation does not constitute an exchange or relinquishment of property.

Furthermore, the Department's decision not to appeal against certain cases where it was held that no transfer occurred in similar amalgamation scenarios was highlighted. The Commissioner of Income-tax acknowledged this stance in a letter, indicating that in cases where shares and bonds were received due to amalgamation, there was no transfer of capital assets under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act. Consequently, the High Court concluded that, based on the Department's acceptance in similar cases, there was no transfer of capital assets in the present references.

Ultimately, due to the Department's position and the acceptance of no transfer in analogous cases, the High Court left the question unanswered in all references. The references were disposed of without any order as to costs, considering the peculiar facts and the Department's consistent view on similar matters.