9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (7) TMI 187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see. The appeal for the asst. yr. 1976-77 is by the revenue. In the previous year for the asst. yr. 1975-76, the assessee had gifted Rs. 1,45,471 to his minor daughters Sarah Kasthuri Hanna Geeta and Bina Sujaritha. He had also made a gift of Rs. 50,000 to his wife. It is common ground that the assessee is a resident but not ordinarily resident. It has been claimed by the assessee in respect of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as for the earlier assessment year. On appeal, the AAC upheld the stand of the ITO for the asst. yr. 1975-76 but the CIT (Appeals) upheld the claim of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1976-77. The appeals are by the assessee and the revenue for the two assessment years. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the assessee before us that u/s 5(1)(ii) we are concerned only with the situs of the movable pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e complete, the gifts were received in India and therefore it is a property situated in India that has been gifted by the assessee to the various donees. 4. We are unable to accept the stand of the revenue in this regard. We consider that the ratio of the order of the Tribunal referred to earlier would apply to the facts of the case. In that case the donor was a resident but not ordinarily resid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
