9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (1) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... August 11, 1971, the two plots on the Mall Road, Karnal, were sold and the sale proceeds of these plots were credited to the accounts of the members of the Hindu undivided family on August 13, 1971. In the context of the liability for payment of capital gains tax arising from the sale of the two plots on the Mall Road, Karnal, the question that arose was with regard to the date on which this partial partition relating to these plots took place. The Income-tax Officer as also the Tribunal held that the date of this partial partition was August 13, 1971, the day on which the sale proceeds of the sale of the plots were distributed amongst the members of the Hindu undivided family. This is the factual background leading to the following questio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of partition has been given under this section in respect of the Hindu undivided family ... Explanation. - In this section, (a) 'partition' means (i) where the property admits of a physical division, a physical division of the property, but a physical division of the income without a physical division of the property producing the income shall not be deemed to be a partition, - " There can be no manner of doubt that the property in question here, namely, each of the two plots on the Mall Road, Karnal, was capable of physical division. A specific finding to this effect was also recorded by the Income-tax Officer which was never thereafter challenged. No physical division of the property ever took place either at the time of or in pursuan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contemplated in the Explanation to section 171 of the Act. Counsel sought to construe these observations to mean that there could be a partition otherwise than by a physical division and, therefore, in the present case, the partition be deemed to relate back to October or November 1970. This again is a contention devoid of merit. A reading of the judgment would show that these observations came to be made in the context of the partition of 18 separate and distinct immovable properties amongst 10 members of the Hindu undivided family, a situation which, on facts, bears no resemblence to the case here. In the result, the reference, namely, question No. (1) as it now stands, is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Revenue and agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
