Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1978 (3) TMI 127 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal revises capital gains tax computation, highlights importance of uncontroverted evidence. The Tribunal overturned the ITO and AAC decisions, ruling that capital gains tax should be charged based on a revised computation of Rs. 838, not the Rs. ...
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                              Tribunal revises capital gains tax computation, highlights importance of uncontroverted evidence.

                              The Tribunal overturned the ITO and AAC decisions, ruling that capital gains tax should be charged based on a revised computation of Rs. 838, not the Rs. 1,00,695 determined by the ITO. The Tribunal emphasized the need to accept uncontroverted affidavits and reports in determining capital gains, citing relevant precedents.




                              Issues Involved:

                              1. Dissolution of the firm and subsequent disputes.
                              2. Appointment of a receiver and arbitrator.
                              3. Auction and sale of assets.
                              4. Computation of capital gains.
                              5. Acceptance of valuation and affidavit evidence.
                              6. Decision of the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC).

                              Detailed Analysis:

                              1. Dissolution of the Firm and Subsequent Disputes:

                              The firm, M/s. Ajmer Merwara Cotton Press Company, Kekri, was dissolved in October 1956. Post-dissolution, disputes arose among partners regarding the settlement of the firm's accounts and disposal of its assets. One partner, Shri Bhanwarlal, filed a suit for partition and distribution of assets, leading to the involvement of the Civil Court.

                              2. Appointment of a Receiver and Arbitrator:

                              The Civil Court appointed a receiver to settle the firm's accounts and an arbitrator who gave an award. However, the arbitrator could not dispose of all the assets, prompting the court to direct the receiver to auction the assets. The auction held on 27th and 29th August 1966 fetched a highest bid of Rs. 1,50,000, with the receiver executing a sale deed on 1st October 1966.

                              3. Auction and Sale of Assets:

                              The sale proceeds were classified as Rs. 25,000 for property and land, and Rs. 1,25,000 for machinery. The Court informed the ITO Beawar about the sale, leading to the issuance of a notice under Section 139(2) of the Income Tax Act. The official receiver filed a return declaring capital gains of Rs. 80,695, later revised to Rs. 838, citing discrepancies in the sale deed's valuation to save registration charges.

                              4. Computation of Capital Gains:

                              The assessee contended that the sale price of the immovable property should have been Rs. 1,25,000 and that of the machinery Rs. 25,000 due to depreciation and long use. The ITO rejected this, relying on the sale deed values. The ITO computed capital gains at Rs. 1,05,695, based on the sale deed's figures and disallowed the evidence provided by the assessee, including an affidavit and a valuer's report.

                              5. Acceptance of Valuation and Affidavit Evidence:

                              The assessee's affidavit detailed the circumstances leading to the undervaluation of the immovable property and overvaluation of machinery in the sale deed. The affidavit stated that the machinery was obsolete and the property value appreciated, supported by a valuer's report showing the property's value in 1954 and 1965. The ITO did not cross-examine the deponent or contest the valuer's report, which detailed the property's valuation using PWD standards and other relevant factors.

                              6. Decision of the ITO and AAC:

                              The AAC upheld the ITO's decision, relying on the sale deed values. However, the Tribunal found that the authorities below did not provide reasons for rejecting the detailed affidavit and valuer's report. The Tribunal emphasized the need to accept uncontroverted affidavits and reports, citing precedents like Mehta Parikh & Co. vs. CIT and L. Sohanlal Gupta vs. CIT. The Tribunal concluded that the capital gains should be computed based on the valuer's report and the affidavit, resulting in a capital gain of Rs. 838, not Rs. 1,00,695 as determined by the ITO.

                              Conclusion:

                              The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing that the capital gains tax be charged based on the revised computation of Rs. 838, thereby overturning the ITO's and AAC's decisions.
                              Full Summary is available for active users!
                              Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                              Topics

                              ActsIncome Tax
                              No Records Found