9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of Section 54C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding the applicability to Hindu undivided families for relief/exemption on capital gains from the sale of ornaments. Analysis: The case involved a question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the applicability of Section 54C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 to a Hindu undivided family. The assessee, a Hindu undivided family, sold jewellery and gold ornaments and reinvested the sale proceeds in new jewellery, claiming relief/exemption under Section 54C. The Income-tax Officer disagreed, citing that Section 54C applies to individuals only, not Hindu undivided families. This view was upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, prompting the Revenue to seek a reference to the High Court. The interpretation of Section 54C was crucial in this case. Section 54C pertained to capital gains arising from the transfer of jewellery held for personal use, requiring reinvestment in new jewellery within a specified period. The Revenue contended that the term "assessee" in the section referred only to individuals, not Hindu undivided families. They argued that the relief was intended for personal use, implying individual ownership. However, the Court disagreed, emphasizing that the term "assessee" in the Act encompassed not just individuals but also Hindu undivided families and other entities. The Court analyzed the definition of "assessee" under the Act, which included persons liable to pay tax, encompassing individuals, Hindu undivided families, companies, and others. While acknowledging the emphasis on personal use in Section 54C, the Court rejected the notion that only individuals were intended beneficiaries. It reasoned that family members of a Hindu undivided family collectively constituted the family, making it eligible for the relief. The Court highlighted that the legislation aimed to extend benefits to family members using the jewellery, even if not by the assessee personally but by dependent family members. Ultimately, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to grant the benefit of Section 54C to the Hindu undivided family. It concluded that the legislation did not restrict the applicability of the section to individuals only, recognizing the collective nature of a Hindu undivided family. Consequently, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, rejecting the Revenue's contention. The question was answered in the affirmative, against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee, leading to the disposal of the reference with no costs awarded.
|
