1999 (9) TMI 129 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Determination of Long Term Capital Gains for assessment year 1994-95.
2. Application of section 49 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for fixing the value as on 1-4-1981.
3. Discrepancy in valuation methods for wealth-tax purposes and Capital Gains purposes.

Analysis:

1. Determination of Long Term Capital Gains for assessment year 1994-95:
The appeal involved the assessment of Long Term Capital Gains for the year 1994-95. The Assessing Officer had determined the Long Term Capital Gains based on the value considered in the valuation report of an approved valuer without specific values for each item of jewellery. The dispute arose regarding the cost of jewellery as on 1-4-1981 and the proportionate value to be considered. The Appellate Tribunal had reduced the value for wealth-tax purposes due to joint ownership and court custody, leading to difficulty in finding a market for the jewellery. The Assessing Officer applied the reduced value for wealth-tax purposes and indexed cost to calculate the capital gains. However, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to adopt the market value of the jewellery as on 1-4-1981 after indexation to determine the cost for calculating capital gains, considering the property's unencumbered status at the time of sale.

2. Application of section 49 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for fixing the value as on 1-4-1981:
The appellant contended that section 49 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 should be applied to determine the cost of acquisition as the property was acquired through a will. Section 49 creates a fiction where the cost of acquisition is deemed to be the cost for which the previous owner acquired the property. The appellant argued that the cost should relate to the previous owner's acquisition, who acquired the assets before 1-4-1981. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's interpretation, emphasizing the need to deduct the cost of the previous owner to calculate capital gains accurately.

3. Discrepancy in valuation methods for wealth-tax purposes and Capital Gains purposes:
The dispute also centered around the valuation methods used for wealth-tax purposes versus Capital Gains purposes. The Assessing Officer relied on the value determined for wealth-tax purposes, which included a discount due to joint ownership and court custody. However, the Tribunal clarified that for calculating Capital Gains, the market value as on 1-4-1981 should be considered after indexation, irrespective of the valuation adopted for wealth-tax purposes. The Tribunal emphasized that the property's unencumbered status at the time of sale should guide the determination of cost for Capital Gains calculation, leading to a successful appeal by the assessee.