TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) whether grant of a 99-year lease of land and building in exchange for fully paid-up shares amounted to a transfer of a capital asset attracting capital gains tax; (ii) whether the shares issued to the partners constituted consideration received by the assessee firm; and (iii) whether the gain, if any, could be assessed as short-term capital gains.
Issue (i): whether grant of a 99-year lease of land and building in exchange for fully paid-up shares amounted to a transfer of a capital asset attracting capital gains tax.
Analysis: Section 2(47)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 brings within the expression "transfer" any transaction or arrangement having the effect of transferring or enabling the enjoyment of immovable property. A long-term lease for 99 years, conferring complete enjoyment of the property on the lessee, was held to be a transfer of the capital asset. The substance of the transaction, and not the label attached to it, showed that the lessor parted with the property for a substantial period in return for value.
Conclusion: The transaction amounted to a transfer of a capital asset and attracted capital gains tax.
Issue (ii): whether the shares issued to the partners constituted consideration received by the assessee firm.
Analysis: The consideration for the lease was not received in cash but by allotment and issue of fully paid-up shares to the partners of the firm in proportion to their shares. Since the partners were the persons through whom the firm acted and the shares were issued only on execution of the lease deeds, the consideration was treated as consideration received for the lease by the firm itself. The arrangement could not be treated as one where the firm received no consideration.
Conclusion: The shares issued to the partners constituted consideration received by the assessee firm.
Issue (iii): whether the gain, if any, could be assessed as short-term capital gains.
Analysis: There was no basis for treating the asset as held for a short period. The material did not support characterization of the transfer as involving short-term capital assets. If capital gains were assessable, the proper character depended on the period of holding and not on any assumption of short-term treatment.
Conclusion: Short-term capital gains treatment was rejected; the matter was directed to be considered as long-term capital gains, subject to examination of the effective lease dates by the Assessing Officer.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in part, the orders of the appellate authorities were set aside on the core issue, and the matter was remitted for fresh assessment on the footing that the transaction gave rise to capital gains, with the Assessing Officer to determine the correct assessment year and whether the gain was assessable as long-term capital gains.
Ratio Decidendi: A long-term lease of immovable property that effectively divests the owner of enjoyment for the lease period, where consideration is received through allotment of shares, is a transfer of a capital asset under Section 2(47)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and must be assessed on the real nature of the transaction rather than its form.
TaxTMI 
