9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (6) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, it was contended that utensils were personal effects held by him for his personal use and, therefore, did not come within the definition of capital assets as contained in cl. (14) of s. 2 of the IT Act. The Commr. was, however, of the opinion that the term `personal effect' (though had a very wide connotation) but it should have intimated relation of the article with the person. According to him, even to ordinary common sense point of view personal effect would mean such tangible property as is owned or carried about by the person. The expression does not impress within its sweep gold or silver articles which are meant for ornamental use on a special occasion only but would mean an article which is ordinarily and commonly used fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsils weighing about 318 Kgs. owned by the lady who was the wife of the director of Shri Ambika Jute Mills were held to be liable to exemption contained in cl. (viii) of s. 5 of the WT Act. The ld. Members were of the opinion that though the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of G.S. Poddar vs. CWT (1965) 57 ITR 207 (Bom) was against the assessee, it was a case where gold articles had been kept in a show-case. But in the case before us the utensils according to the well-established habits, customs and tradition of the family to which the assessee belonged could be used for her household and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of H.H. Maharaja Rana Hemantsinghji 1976 CTR (SC) 188 : (1976) 103 ITR 61 (SC) was distinguisha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not held by the assessee for personal use. Therefore, the heirloom jewellery constituted the personal effects of the assessee within the meaning of s. 2(14) before amendment w.e.f. 1st April, 1973, and the profits and gains arising from the sale thereof were not liable to tax under s. 45". 4. On behalf of the Revenue, our attention was again drawn to the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rana Hemantsinghji in which it was observed by their Lordships that an intimate connection between the effects and the person of the assessee must be shown to exist to render them "personal effects" within the meaning of that expression used in cl. (ii) of the exceptions in s. 2(4A) of the IT Act. According to them, the legislature ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T, the assessee's contention only was that the silver utensils represented personal effects held for personal use. Thereafter, the assessee's representative sought to lay down certain legal proposition. So far as the use of the utensils was concerned, the only evidence produced by the assessee was the xerox copy of the sale bill. It is not the description in the bill that would decide the use of the articles. As laid down in the case of Rana Hemantsinghji, the use should be intimate and connected with the assessee. A mere ceremonial use may not be sufficient. The assessee's contention, of course, was that the utensils consisted of Thalis, katoria, glasses, spoons, forks, etc. But this contention was not supported by any evidence except that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
