Court finds settlement amount not taxable as Long Term Capital Gain due to non-transferable pre-emption right

The Tribunal held that the amount received by the assessee in a court settlement was not taxable as Long Term Capital Gain. It determined that the right of pre-emption was not a "Capital Asset" under the Income Tax Act, as it was merely an enforceable contract right and did not create a transferable interest. The Tribunal found that the amount received was to settle litigation and avoid costs, not for the transfer of a capital asset. Therefore, the appeal was allowed, and the lower tax authorities' orders were quashed.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Whether the amount of Rs. 20,40,00,000/- received by the assessee is taxable as Long Term Capital Gain.
2. Whether the right of pre-emption/right of first priority of purchase of the premises is a "Capital Asset" under Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Whether the relinquishment of the right of pre-emption falls under the definition of "Transfer" under Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. Computation of Capital Gain.
5. Validity of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Summary:

Issue 1: Taxability of Rs. 20,40,00,000/- as Long Term Capital Gain

The assessee received Rs. 20,40,00,000/- in a court settlement, claimed as non-taxable, and credited it directly to the partners' capital accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated this amount as Long Term Capital Gain, arguing that the right of pre-emption/right of first priority of purchase is a "Capital Asset" under Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its relinquishment is a "Transfer" under Section 2(47) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld this view, stating that the amount received was for relinquishing the right of pre-emptive purchase and the right to perpetual lease.

Issue 2: Right of Pre-emption as a "Capital Asset"

The AO concluded that the right of pre-emption falls under the definition of "Capital Asset" as per Section 2(14) of the Act. The CIT(A) agreed, holding that the right of pre-emption and the right to perpetual lease are valuable rights (capital assets) and their transfer is exigible to capital gain tax.

Issue 3: Relinquishment as "Transfer"

The AO argued that the relinquishment of the right of pre-emption is a "Transfer" under Section 2(47) of the Act. The CIT(A) supported this, stating that the assessee's relinquishment of these rights under the settlement agreement constituted a transfer, making the amount received taxable as capital gains.

Issue 4: Computation of Capital Gain

The AO considered the date of the lease deed (19.04.2004) as the date of acquisition of the capital asset, with no cost of acquisition, making the cost of acquisition Nil. The date of transfer was taken as 31.05.2012, with the sale consideration being Rs. 20,40,00,000/-.

Issue 5: Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c)

The CIT(A) initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) for furnishing inaccurate particulars leading to the concealment of taxable income. The assessee contended that the initiation of these proceedings was unwarranted and untenable in law.

Judgment:

The Tribunal held that the right of pre-emption under the lease deed was not a "Capital Asset" as defined under Section 2(14) of the Act. It was merely an enforceable contract right contingent on the sale of the premises by the lessor and did not create any alienable or transferable interest. The Tribunal concluded that the amount received by the assessee was not for the transfer of a capital asset but was to make the premises free of litigation and avoid costs of protracted civil litigation. Consequently, the amount was not taxable as capital gains. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the orders of the lower tax authorities were quashed.

---