2012 (2) TMI 192

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned by virtue of family settlement dated 11-9-2000. Accordingly, the indexed cost of acquisition should be as per F.Y. 2000-01, when the assessee first held the property and not 1981-82." 2. Brief facts are: The assessee succeeded to a property on the demise of his mother in 1986. This property was acquired by the deceased mother prior to 1-4-1981. During the year in question the assessee sold this property and offered long term capital gains. Return was processed u/s 143(1). Thereafter a notice u/s 148 was issued. In reassessment proceedings, while computing the long term capital gains, AO held that assessee was not eligible for indexation of cost of acquisition w.e.f. 1-4-1981 as the assessee became owner consequent to a family settlem....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assets received under family settlement in the case of CIT v. Shanti Chandran (2000) 241 ITR 371. In that case it was held that when the assessee received certain shares under a settlement effected by her father, and subsequently sold the shares, it is the cost to the previous owner (father) that is to be taken into account as the cost of acquisition of the shares.     Accordingly it is held that the cost of acquisition of the property sold by the appellant in the A.Y. 2002-03 is to be worked out with reference to the cost inflation index of 1-4-1981, and not the date of death of the mother, or of the date of the family settlement. Accordingly, the addition made of long term capital gains of Rs. 26,48,855/- is deleted." ....