Capital gains computation turns on actual consideration received, while market value applies only under the statutory proviso.

For capital gains computation under Section 12B(2), "full value of the consideration" is the price actually received for the transfer, not the market value of the asset. Market value can be substituted only where the proviso applies, namely in the specified connected-transfer and tax-avoidance conditions. On the facts, the Tribunal's record did not clearly show whether the assessee received the stated market price or only the book value in the transfer document, so a fresh factual finding was necessary. The matter was therefore remitted for clear determination of the actual consideration received before final disposal.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether, for computation of capital gains under Section 12B(2), the expression "full value of the consideration" means the market value of the transferred asset or the price actually received by the transferor; (ii) Whether the findings recorded by the Appellate Tribunal were sufficiently clear for answering the reference, or the matter required remand for a fresh finding on the actual consideration received.

Issue (i): Whether, for computation of capital gains under Section 12B(2), the expression "full value of the consideration" means the market value of the transferred asset or the price actually received by the transferor.

Analysis: The provision requires deduction of expenditure and actual cost from the full value of the consideration for which the transfer is made. The expression was construed as referring to the whole price or value received by the transferor in exchange for the asset, not the market value of the asset transferred. The Court also distinguished the main part of Section 12B(2) from the first proviso, under which fair market value can be substituted only where the statutory conditions of connected transfer and tax-avoidance object are satisfied. Since those conditions were not attracted, the market value could not be treated as the consideration under the main provision.

Conclusion: The expression "full value of the consideration" does not mean the market value of the capital asset and, absent the proviso, the actual price received governs computation.

Issue (ii): Whether the findings recorded by the Appellate Tribunal were sufficiently clear for answering the reference, or the matter required remand for a fresh finding on the actual consideration received.

Analysis: The Tribunal's order and the statement of case did not clearly and consistently disclose whether the assessee had actually received the stated market price or only the book value recorded in the transfer document. As the finding on the actual contract price was obscure, the reference could not be finally answered on the existing record. A clear factual determination by the Tribunal was necessary, with opportunity to the respondent to explain the unusual transaction and to produce supporting evidence.

Conclusion: The matter required remand to the Tribunal for a clear finding on the actual consideration received and for final disposal of the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The legal interpretation of Section 12B(2) was decided against treating market value as the ordinary measure of consideration, but the case was sent back because the factual basis for applying that interpretation was not clearly found.

Ratio Decidendi: For capital gains computation under Section 12B(2), "full value of the consideration" means the whole price actually received for the transfer, and market value can replace it only where the statutory conditions in the proviso are satisfied.

---