9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 986X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olding, the conduct and subsequent dealing of the assessee in respect of the property, the manner of its disposal and the frequency and multiplicity of transactions, afford valuable guides in determining whether the assessee is carrying on a trading activity and whether a particular transaction should be stamped with the character of a trading adventure. See CIT v. V.A.Trivedi (1987 (1) TMI 12 - BOMBAY High Court ) Tribunal, as a final fact finding authority has confirmed the findings of fact returned by the CIT (A). While doing so, it did not look at any solitary fact to determine as to whether the transactions in question resulted in capital gains or in business income. Several factors were considered, which included the intention of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entered into an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with Balarpur Industries Limited and Dalmia Promoters for developing a portion of the said land. According to the learned counsel for the Revenue, the two properties which are sold to Mr Niranjan Koirala and Ms Sheila Aggarwal, respectively, were also part of the Memorandum of Understanding. However, according to the learned counsel for the assessee, both these properties, which are the subject matter of the present appeal, were excluded from the Memorandum of Understanding for development of the properties. Anyhow, the said Memorandum of Understanding was cancelled on 08.06.2005 and the development of land, as proposed under the Memorandum of Understanding, did not take place. Prior to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tention of the assessee, at the time of purchase of the property in 1952 was to establish a dairy farm in which it would produce milk. The said property was held as an asset and shown as a fixed asset in the books of the assessee from 1952 onwards. The CIT (A) also observed that no contrary fact had been brought on record by the Assessing Officer and that successive assessments from the date of purchase of the land accepted the treatment of the asset as a fixed asset in the books of the assessee. The CIT (A) also observed that there had been no sale or purchase of land by the assessee throughout all these years from 1952 except for the two transactions, which are subject matter of the present appeal. The CIT (A) held that the original inten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the assessee is carrying on a trading activity and whether a particular transaction should be stamped with the character of a trading adventure. 7. We are in agreement with these observations of the Bombay High Court. We may also point out that in a Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of CIT v. Dr Indu Bala Chhabra : (2003) 132 Taxman (Delhi), this Court observed that the question of distinction between a capital sale and an adventure in the nature of trade can be drawn out in respect of a particular transaction but it cannot be so determined solely on the application of an abstract rule, principle or test, and would depend on all the facts and circumstances of the case. Importantly, the Division Bench held that the find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
