https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195968 The Tribunal determined that the contribution of property by the assessee towards the firm's capital constituted a transfer under s. 2(47) of the IT Act, attracting capital gain tax. However, following the Supreme Court's decision in Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT, it was established that such contributions do not always trigger capital gain tax unless they are a device to evade tax. In this case, as there was no evidence of tax evasion, the Court ruled that the contribution of property towards the firm's capital was not subject to capital gain tax, resolving the matter in favor of the assessee. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Nov 2017 12:59:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195968 The Tribunal determined that the contribution of property by the assessee towards the firm's capital constituted a transfer under s. 2(47) of the IT Act, attracting capital gain tax. However, following the Supreme Court's decision in Sunil Siddharthbhai v. CIT, it was established that such contributions do not always trigger capital gain tax unless they are a device to evade tax. In this case, as there was no evidence of tax evasion, the Court ruled that the contribution of property towards the firm's capital was not subject to capital gain tax, resolving the matter in favor of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195968