https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19467 Route permits were treated as capital assets, but capital gains tax could arise on their transfer only if a cost of acquisition was ascertainable. Applying that principle, the Court held that where the asset has no identifiable cost of acquisition, the charging provision for capital gains cannot operate on the transfer consideration. The application fees and incidental expenses incurred to obtain the permits were not regarded as the permits' cost of acquisition. As a result, the transfer of the route permits did not attract taxable capital gains, and the claim to treat those expenses as acquisition cost failed. en-us Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Nov 2009 13:33:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19467 Route permits were treated as capital assets, but capital gains tax could arise on their transfer only if a cost of acquisition was ascertainable. Applying that principle, the Court held that where the asset has no identifiable cost of acquisition, the charging provision for capital gains cannot operate on the transfer consideration. The application fees and incidental expenses incurred to obtain the permits were not regarded as the permits' cost of acquisition. As a result, the transfer of the route permits did not attract taxable capital gains, and the claim to treat those expenses as acquisition cost failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 18 Aug 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19467