9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (7) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ividuals and not to HUFs like the assessee. This view of the ITO was supported by the AAC who dismissed the assessee's appeal. It is thus that the mater is in appeal before us. 2. The ld. counsel for the assessee has pointed out that there was no justification for restricting the operation of s. 54(c) to individual assessee's only. In the first place, the section referred to 'an assessee' as against 'an individual'. If it was intended that the exemption was applicable only to individuals and not to other type of assessees, the Parliament would have as in several other sections obtaining especially in Chap. VIA of the Income-tax, where the nature of the assessee individual, company etc. is specifically referred to in connection with a rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'him'. The expression 'him' clearly indicated that s. 54(c) had application only to "Individuals." 4. The provisions of s. 54(c) which were deleted w.e.f. 1st April 1976 are as under: "Where the capital gain arise from the transfer of a capital asset, being jewellery held for personal use by the assessee or any member of his family dependent on him and the assessee has, within a period of six months after such transfer, acquired any other jewellery for personal use by the assessee or any member of his family dependent on him, the capital gain shall be dealt with in accordance with the following provisions of this section, that is to say— (i) If the cost of the jewellery so acquired is not less than the full value of the considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disfigurement, even if the exemption is apparently for the "assessee". The extended clause "any member of his family dependent on him" would apply where the assessee is an 'individual.' The learned counsel for the Department has pointed out that sufficient meaning should be given to the later clause. The contention is acceptable but it is clear that the later clause has a purpose to serve, viz. the exemption would apply not merely in respect of the jewellery used by the individual assessee by himself but also where the dependent used the same. A proper construction therefore of the words of the section would require that the exemption applied to all assessees can be of personal use. For instance, we are not sure where in the case of an AOP ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
