TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (11) TMI 275
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. From the records it is seen that the Assistant Collector had observed that the above-mentioned articles had not been used by the appellant. He was asked to operate them but failed to do so. According to the Assistant Collector, he had stated that these articles were lying with his in-laws from whom he got them after a decree (annulling his marriage). There was no observation that the articles had not been used at all. 3. The Collector (Appeals) observed that there was an admission by the appellant that the items had been lying with his in-laws. The Collector (Appeals) held that the items could not have been in the possession and use of the appellant or his family abroad. He accordingly rejected the appeal. 4. When this....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rived in India on 29-3-1982. Thus the articles had been in the possession and use of himself and/or his family for over a year. He pointed out that under the Transfer of Residence Rules it was not necessary that the articles should have been in the use of the passenger personally. 7. Shri Singh contested the observation of the Assistant Collector that the appellant did not know how to use the two articles. He stated that the appellant was an educated man and would certainly have known how to use the articles. In fact, before the Collector (Appeals) he had demonstrated his knowledge. Before the Assistant Collector he could not demonstrate the use of the articles because they could not be plugged into a power source. 8. Shri Singh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t should be deemed to have been a member of his family. It appears that the two articles were in the possession and use of both of them jointly until their separation, and thereafter (perhaps after some time gap) in the possession of the appellant alone. In the circumstances of the case, it is reasonably evident that the articles were in the possession and use of the appellant and/or his family for over a year. We also find that there is no allegation in this case, as there is in some other cases, that the articles were brand new and did not show signs of use. As regards the observation of the Assistant Collector that the appellant did not know how to use the articles, it seems somewhat unlikely that in these days even a person of normal ed....