9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the contribution of shares by the assessee to a partnership firm constitutes a "transfer" under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, resulting in capital gains chargeable to tax. 2. Whether the transfer of shares to the partnership firm was for consideration, and if so, whether capital gains resulted from such transfer. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Definition of "Transfer" under Section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Summary: The court examined whether the introduction of a capital asset by an individual into a partnership firm constitutes a "transfer" under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, thereby making any resulting capital gains taxable under section 45. The court emphasized that the term "transfer" includes the sale, exchange, relinquishment, or extinguishment of any rights in a capital asset. Key Points: 1. Extinguishment of Rights: When a partner introduces a capital asset into a partnership, the individual's rights in the asset are extinguished, and the asset becomes the property of the partnership. This extinguishment constitutes a "transfer" under section 2(47). 2. Legal Precedents: The court referred to the Full Bench decision of the Kerala High Court in A. Abdul Rahim v. CIT and the Karnataka High Court in Addl. CIT v. M.A.J. Vasanaik, both of which held that such transactions constitute a transfer. 3. Supreme Court Rulings: The court distinguished the present case from the Supreme Court ruling in CIT v. Hind Construction Ltd., noting that the latter did not consider the extended definition of "transfer" under section 2(47). Conclusion: The court concluded that the introduction of a capital asset by an individual into a partnership firm constitutes a "transfer" under section 2(47), making any resulting capital gains taxable under section 45. Issue 2: Consideration for Transfer and Resulting Capital Gains Summary: The court analyzed whether the transfer of shares to the partnership firm was for consideration and whether it resulted in capital gains. The court noted that the capital account of the partner introducing the asset is credited with an amount equivalent to the market value of the asset, which constitutes consideration for the transfer. Key Points: 1. Crediting Capital Account: The court observed that crediting the capital account of the partner with the market value of the asset introduced into the partnership constitutes consideration. 2. Nexus Between Transfer and Consideration: There is a direct nexus between the extinguishment of the partner's rights in the asset and the credit entry in the capital account, indicating that the transfer is for consideration. 3. Capital Gains: The difference between the market value credited to the capital account and the original cost of acquisition constitutes capital gains, which are taxable under section 45. Conclusion: The court held that the transfer of shares to the partnership firm was for consideration, and capital gains arising from the transaction are taxable under section 45. Judgments Delivered: 1. Reference No. 34 of 1980: - Question 1: Whether the contribution in the form of shares by the assessee in the partnership firm constitutes a "transfer" under section 2(47) of the Act resulting in capital gains chargeable to tax. - Answer: In the negative and in favor of the revenue. - Question 2: If the reply to Question 1 is in favor of the revenue, whether the Tribunal erred in not considering whether the transfer is with or without consideration. - Answer: In the affirmative and in favor of the revenue. The matter is remitted to the Tribunal for deciding on merits in accordance with the law in light of the decision in Reference No. 235 of 1980. 2. Reference No. 235 of 1980: - Question 1: Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that no capital gains resulted from the transfer of shares held by the assessee to the partnership firm as his capital contribution. - Answer: In the negative and against the assessee. The transfer was for consideration, and capital gains arising or accruing from the transaction are taxable under section 45. - Question 2: Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that there was a "transfer" within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, of the shares contributed by the assessee as capital to the partnership firm. - Answer: In the affirmative and in favor of the revenue. The factual position regarding whether or not capital gains had arisen or accrued will be decided by the Tribunal in accordance with the law if disputed. Certification for Appeal: The court granted a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court for both matters as envisioned by section 261 of the Act.
|
