2005 (9) TMI 69

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nts was long-term capital gains and thereby the assessee was entitled to deduction from such gains as per law?" The assessment year is 1985-86 and the relevant accounting period is S.Y. 2040. The assessee, an individual, became a member in Venus Apartments (Galaxy Co-operative Housing Society). He was allotted flat No. G. 8 in the building of the society known as Galaxy Bungalow vide resolution No. 5 dated November 4, 1980, passed by the managing committee of the society. The assessee paid the purchase price of the property in instalments as follows: Amount (Rs.) Date   5,025 11-10-1980 50,000 19-3-1981 25,000 29-7-1981      200 15-11-1981 50,000 21-7-1982 25,000 11-10-1982 On the date of allotment, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ision of this court rendered in the case of CIT v. Anilaben Upendra Shah [2003] 262 ITR 657. Though served there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent-assessee. In the aforesaid decision in the case of CIT v. Anilaben Upendra Shah [2003] 262 ITR 657 this court has held: "It is thus clear that the member of a co-operative housing society only owns the shares in that society. The right to enjoy, or derive from, any land or building belonging to the co-operative housing society is merely an incidental right flowing from the ownership of the shares. A member of a co-operative housing society cannot sell all his shares in a co-operative housing society and still retain any interest in any property, whether land or building, belonging to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... facts of the case, it is apparent that the assessee in the present case was allotted a share by the co-operative housing society on November 4, 1980, and the sale of the same took place on April 30, 1984, i.e., after a period of 36 months. The assessee was therefore justified in treating the surplus consideration as long-term capital gains. The Tribunal was therefore justified in holding that the capital gains so arising were long-term capital gains and the assessee was entitled to deduction from such gains as per law. The question is therefore answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The reference stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
Case laws, Decisions, Ju .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X