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.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
HC dismissed the appeal and affirmed ITAT's decision that the gain on the vintage motorcar is taxable as capital gains because the car did not qualify as a "personal effect." The Court held that under the statutory definition of capital asset personal effects are excluded only if an intimate connection with personal or household use is established; mere capability or ownership of a car does not suffice. The Assessee failed to adduce evidence of personal use and relied on irrelevant factors considered by CIT(A). Material indicators (use of employer's car, absence of occasional use, non-parking at residence, no maintenance expenditure) supported ITAT's factual finding, and the substantial question of law was answered against the Assessee.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.