TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Leasehold rights classified as capital assets under Indian Income-tax Act</h1> <h3>Rajendra Mining Syndicate Versus Commissioner of Income-tax</h3> The court held that leasehold rights are considered capital assets under the Indian Income-tax Act, rejecting the argument that they are movable property. ... - Issues:1. Whether the leasehold rights are considered capital assets under the Indian Income-tax Act.2. Whether the sale of leasehold rights took place only on the date of the sale deed execution.Analysis:Issue 1:The court was asked to determine if the leasehold rights held by the assessee were capital assets as per section 12B of the Indian Income-tax Act. The assessee argued that leasehold rights in a mine are movable property and not subject to section 12B. However, the court disagreed, stating that leasehold rights are indeed capital assets under the Act. The definition of 'capital asset' in section 2(4A) includes property held by an assessee, not falling under specific exclusions. The court referenced previous cases to support this interpretation, emphasizing that the rights transferred by the assessee constituted a capital asset. Therefore, the first question was answered in favor of the department.Issue 2:The second question revolved around whether the capital gains tax applied to the transaction, depending on the transfer date. The assessee claimed the transfer occurred before the enactment of section 12B, citing an agreement entered into before March 31, 1946. However, the court found that the sale deed execution was essential for the sale to be considered effective. The terms of the agreement indicated that it was subject to approval and did not confer immediate property rights to the vendee. The court rejected the argument that possession and agreement alone constituted a sale, emphasizing the necessity of a proper sale deed for title transfer. Precedents were cited to support this view, highlighting that a sale is only completed upon execution and registration of the sale deed. Consequently, the second question was also answered against the assessee.In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the department on both issues, affirming that the leasehold rights were capital assets and that the sale of those rights was considered to have taken place only upon the execution and registration of the sale deed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
