9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (7) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the nature of trade, as is sought to be pleaded by learned counsel for the Revenue. We do not find any ground to interfere with the concurrent findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure of trade? (o Whether the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse in law and on facts when it has not considered the facts pointed out by the Department?" Briefly stated, the material facts giving rise to the present appeal are the respondent, hereinafter referred to as the assessee, is a senior IAS officer. In the year 1971, he was allotted a plot of land admeasuring 664 sq. m. by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), in a group housing society at Anand Lok, New Delhi. The plot was acquired by the assessee jointly with his brother for a total consideration of Rs. 31,000. A perpetual sub-lease was executed by the DDA in favour of both of them on May 11, 1971. The lease contained a clause that the allottees shall constr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is wealth-tax returns as investment in plot; there was no change in the said plot from 1971 to 1989; he was not permitted by the DDA to sell a portion of the land and to meet the cost of construction it became necessary for the assessee to construct the flats. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), accordingly directed the Assessing Officer to compute the income from sale of the flats as long-term capital gains. The Revenue took the matter in further appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has affirmed the view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Hence, the present appeal. We have heard Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue. Ms. Bansal would submit that the intention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will depend on the facts and circumstances of a particular case. Dealing with the expression "adventure in the nature of trade" in Raja Bahadur Kamakhya Narain Singh v. CIT [1970] 77 ITR 253, the apex court observed that if the transaction is in the ordinary line of the assessee's business there would hardly be any difficulty in concluding that it was a trading transaction. But where it is not, the facts must be properly assessed to discover whether it was in the nature of trade. Similar views were expressed by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Sutlej Cotton Mills Supply Agency Ltd. [1975] 100 ITR 706. Having perused the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal, in the light of the aforenoted broad principles, we are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
