9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (7) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1965, the Govt. of India promulgated what was called the " National Defence Remittance Scheme " so that foreign exchange might become available for the country's defence and other essential requirements. Under the scheme, Indian Nationals (abroad) were allowed to remit money from foreign countries on and after October 26, 1965, by way of gifts, remittances for family maintenance, transfer of capital, etc. Neither the remitters nor the recipients were liable to income-tax on such amounts. It was also assured that the source of such remittances from abroad would not be questioned. And to add to all these, it was also provided that the recipient of the remittance or his nominee would, in such cases, be also given transferable import licence o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereof was hence in the nature of profit to be assessed as long-term capital gain. The assessee went up in appeal before the Tribunal. In the original grounds of appeal before the Tribunal, consistently with the case urged before the lower authorities, the assessee persisted only with his contention that his cost of acquisition in respect of the import entitlement was to be reckoned at 60% of the value of the remittance and not nil as taken by the authorities below. However, the assessee filed subsequently an additional ground of appeal urging that in the view taken by the lower authorities that the import licence did not cost anything to the assessee, the provisions of s. 45 of the I.T. Act, 1961, would not apply at all to the transfer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt section it was given a long-term capital asset. But then it was not as if whenever a transfer of capital asset, whether long-term or short-term, was effected for consideration, the transaction would, of necessity, give rise to capital gain or capital loss, according to the Tribunal. Then the Tribunal, in this connection, referred to certain authorities of this court and other courts and then referred to the clarification in the Press Note of the Govt. of India, that any payment received in consideration of the transfer of such import entitlement would be treated as capital gains, which would be of little purpose in this case, as, it was not open to the executive authority to bring it to tax as capital gains if it was not taxable as such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pable of being estimated. If that is the position, then in our opinion, by the well settled principle as laid down in the latest decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. B. C. Srinivasa Setty [1981] 128 ITR 294, where it has been held that the asset which did not cost the assessee anything nor was it capable of being estimated a cost could never be subjected to taxation under the scheme of capital gains tax under the I.T. Act, 1961, or the Indian I.T. Act, 1922. In this connection, we may refer to some of the decisions, to which our attention was drawn, of this court in the case of CIT v. Anglo India Jute Mills Co. Ltd. [1981] 129 ITR 352, of the Madras High Court in the case of Nonsuch Tea Estates Ltd. v. CIT [1981] 129 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
