9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 49(1)(ii) and the Explanations thereto, the Tribunal was right in holding that on the transfer of property No. W-80, Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi, the assessee had made a short-term capital gains and not long-term capital gains?" The dispute relates to the assessment year 1974-75. The factual position, as indicated in the statement of the case, is as follows: The assessee during the assessment year in question sold a plot of land measuring 1,000 sq. yards in Greater Kailash-II on January 4, 1974. He had purchased the plot by a sale deed which was registered on December 24, 1973. The Income-tax Officer considered that the period between the purchase of the plot and the sale thereof, that is, the period of ownership of the plot, was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that since the capital asset in question was held by the previous owner for a period of more than 60 months, the capital gains arising from the sale thereof is to be taken as long-term capital gains. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The stand of the Revenue was that the title to the plot remained with the assessee for a period of 11 days only. It was noticed by the Tribunal that a gift-tax return was also filed by the father of the assessee showing the value of the gift at Rs. 17,100 and the Department had considered that what was gifted to the assessee was the right of ownership of the plot to the assessee, which was valued by the Department at Rs. 80,000 for the purpose of cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal accepted the Department's stand. It also observed that the payment of Rs. 21,000 remained a deposit only till the plot was allotted to the assessee and the sale thereof was also registered by the sale deed. The title in the property was got by the assessee only when the sale deed was executed and registered in December 1973. There were endorsements only on the original receipt granted by the DLF in respect of the original deposit made by the original buyer and that the further endorsement on the receipts showed the transfer of the right only, but not of the plot. On being moved for a reference, the question, as set out above, has been referred for opinion of this court. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue. There is no appear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
