9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " - It is evident from the Explanation that where the previous owner of an asset which was sold had himself acquired it by any of the modes set out in section 49(1) in its sub-clauses (i) to (iv) it is the cost incurred by the owner who had owned the asset prior to the previous owner that is required to be taken into account and not the cost incurred by the previous owner at the time he received the asset in any of the modes set out in sub-clauses (i) to (iv) of section 49(1). In this case, Sourirajulu paid a sum of Rs. 1 lakh to the retiring partner in 1972 at the time the firm was dissolved. The cost of the acquisition, therefore, is not to be computed by taking that one lakh rupees into account but by only looking to the cost of the acqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed from Sourirajulu a sum of Rs. 1 lakh. Subsequently, Sourirajulu entered into a partnership with two of his adult sons on April 1, 1973, and that firm of Sourirajulu and Sons sold the theatre and derived a capital gain from that sale. For the purpose of computing the capital gain it was claimed by the firm that the sum of Rs. 1 lakh paid by Sourirajulu to the retiring partner on October 1, 1972, should also be treated as part of the cost of acquisition, in addition to the cost that had been originally incurred by the earlier firm for acquiring the theatre. That claim though rejected by the Assessing Officer as also by the Commissioner (Appeals), having been allowed by the Tribunal, the reference has been brought before us by the Reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ous owner of the property' in relation to any capital asset owned by any assessee means the last previous owner of the capital asset who acquired it by a mode of acquisition other than that referred to in clause (i) or clause (ii) or clause (iii) or clause (iv) of this sub-section." It is evident from the Explanation that where the previous owner of an asset which was sold had himself acquired it by any of the modes set out in section 49(1) in its sub-clauses (i) to (iv) it is the cost incurred by the owner who had owned the asset prior to the previous owner that is required to be taken into account and not the cost incurred by the previous owner at the time he received the asset in any of the modes set out in sub-clauses (i) to (iv) of s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
