2018 (2) TMI 113 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of assessment framed u/s 16 (1) of the Gift Tax Act - whether condition precedent for reassessment of the proceedings under the said provision was not satisfied? - Held that - It is not disputed that in Abhinandan Investments 2015 (11) TMI 1219 - DELHI HIGH COURT this Court reversed the ITAT s findings and held that the consideration received and shown by the assessee to be a capital loss in income tax proceedings was a device. At the same time while holding that the characteristic of the sale proceeds as a capital loss, was sham, the Court did not ignore the underlying validity of the share transaction or transfer. It proceeded to bring the amounts into question to tax either as business receipts or as business losses. Such being the case, this Court is of the opinion that alike treatment had to be given. Furthermore, at the stage, when the ITAT intervened in gift tax proceedings (which are the subject matter in these appeals), it considered only the validity of the proceedings, but, did not consider whether in fact the transaction under Section 4(1)(a) amounted to a deemed gift; no conclusive finding in that regard was rendered; nor any finding could have been rendered or was given. For the above reasons, the impugned orders are hereby set aside. The matters are remitted to the ITAT for fresh consideration.

Issues involved:
1. Validity of assessment under Section 16(1) of the Gift Tax Act.
2. Interpretation of renouncement of rights issue as a deemed gift under Section 4(1)(a) of the Gift Tax Act.
3. Consideration of ITAT's findings in income tax proceedings in gift tax assessment.
4. Applicability of Rule 20 of the Third Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act in gift tax assessment.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Validity of assessment under Section 16(1) of the Gift Tax Act:
The primary issue in this case revolved around the correctness of the assessment framed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 16(1) of the Gift Tax Act. The ITAT quashed the assessment on the grounds that the condition precedent for reassessment under the said provision was not satisfied. The Gift Tax Officer issued a notice based on the second explanation to Section 16(1), contending that the renouncement of the rights issue by the assessee constituted a notional or deemed gift under Section 4(1)(a) of the Gift Tax Act. However, the ITAT reversed the AO's stand, leading to a challenge by the Revenue regarding the validity of the notice under Section 16.

Issue 2: Interpretation of renouncement of rights issue as a deemed gift:
The case involved the interpretation of the renouncement of rights issue by the assessee as a deemed gift under Section 4(1)(a) of the Gift Tax Act. The Revenue argued that the renouncement was for inadequate consideration, thereby constituting a notional gift. The ITAT's decision to reverse the AO's stand raised questions regarding the applicability of gift tax liability in this scenario, leading to a detailed analysis of the nature of the transaction and the considerations involved.

Issue 3: Consideration of ITAT's findings in income tax proceedings in gift tax assessment:
The Court considered the ITAT's findings in the income tax proceedings, where the AO had disregarded the claim for capital loss, treating the transaction as a sham. The ITAT's decision in the income tax appeals favored the assessee, leading to successful appeals before the CIT(A) and ultimately the ITAT. However, the Court reversed the ITAT's findings in the income tax proceedings, which influenced the assessment under the Gift Tax Act, raising questions about the consistency and validity of the assessments across different tax regimes.

Issue 4: Applicability of Rule 20 of the Third Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act:
The learned counsel for the Revenue relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Reva Investment Pvt. Ltd. and Rule 20 of the Third Schedule to the Wealth Tax Act to support the Revenue's arguments. The applicability of these legal provisions and precedents in the context of the gift tax assessment added a layer of complexity to the case, requiring a thorough analysis of the legal framework and its implications on the present matter.

In conclusion, the High Court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matters to the ITAT for fresh consideration in accordance with the law. The appeals were allowed based on the Court's detailed analysis of the issues involved, including the validity of the assessment under the Gift Tax Act, the interpretation of renouncement as a deemed gift, the consideration of ITAT's findings in income tax proceedings, and the applicability of relevant legal provisions and precedents.

← Previous Next →