9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred by the Tribunal for answer of this court, which read as under : " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in not admitting the claim of the adverse possession admitted by the learned Third Additional District Judge, Jabalpur ? 2. If the answer to the above is in the affirmative, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled by the assessee for the assessment years 1972-73, 1973-74, 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, the assessee included the value of those properties in her net wealth and represented that the property belonged to her and she was the owner. The Wealth-tax Officer completed the assessments for the assessment years 1972-73 to 1976-77, by his order dated February 23, 1979. In these assessments at the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operty for all the assessment years under appeal. It was contended by the assessee that by virtue of the gift deed dated May 31, 1956, she had ceased to be the owner of this property. The order of the Third Additional District Judge, Jabalpur, dated April 16, 1986, was produced before the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner and it was pleaded that both the sons of the assessee, viz., S/Shri N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns and then in the same breath, she had produced the order of the Additional District Judge showing that both the sons acquired the property by adverse possession. Both these contradictory pleas negative the stand of the assessee. Once she has failed to satisfy regarding gift of property to her sons somehow she tried to justify this stand by resorting to plea of adverse possession by producing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
