1990 (10) TMI 343

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax Officer, Ratlam, against the judgment and decree dated 14th October, 1977, passed by the District Judge, Ratlam, in Civil Appeal No. 34 of 1977 arising out of the judgment and decree passed in Civil Original Suit No. 5-A/75. 2.. This appeal was admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Whether the finding of the court below that the transfer of the suit property in favour ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as been filed. 4.. It is not in dispute that the suit property originally belonged to Kanhaiyalal, who along with his father Lalchand, had mortgaged the suit house in favour of the respondent No. 1, Abhayakumar. Kanhaiyalal sold his rights in the house thereafter to one Mishrilal and deposited Rs. 800 towards interest and Rs. 3,500 towards principal. Later on, for the balance amount of Rs. 6,50....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... burden was on the respondent No. 1 to show that the property was acquired by him for valuable consideration and it was not sold to defraud the revenue. 6.. Shri S.D. Sanghi, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand contended that the lower courts have correctly interpreted section 33-A of the Act, which requires the proof of the fact that the property was transferred with the int....