1997 (7) TMI 8
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y, styled Electric Control Gear Pvt. Ltd., for a consideration of Rs. 8 lakhs. The erstwhile partners of the assessee-firm were allotted the shares of the same value in their profit sharing proportion. The Income-tax Officer held that depreciation allowed to the assessee-firm amounting to Rs. 3,32,863 in respect of the assets transferred by the firm to the said company was chargeable to tax under the provisions of section 41(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). He also brought to tax capital gains of Rs. 8 lakhs, being purchase consideration received by the assessee and after excluding the sum of Rs. 5,000 as basic exemption, included the sum of Rs. 7,95,000 in the computation of the total income of the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... holding that the provisions of section 41(2) were applicable ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee has earned capital gains, which was liable to tax under the provisions of section 45 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the status of the assessee was a registered firm and not that of an association of persons ? 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly rejected the claim of the assessee that surplus realised by it on sale to the limited company was not chargeable to tax, being realisation sale ? 6. Whether, on the facts an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings before the Income-tax Officer and that the said price was as per the value assessed by the valuers at the time of execution of the agreement. In the present case there is nothing to indicate the price attributable to the assets like the machinery, plant or building out of the consideration amount of Rs. 8 lakhs. Merely because a sum of Rs. 3,32,863 had been allowed as depreciation to the assessee-firm, it could not be said, that was the excess amount between the price and the written down value. Question No. 2 was, therefore, rightly answered against the Revenue by the High Court. On question No. 4 the High Court has taken the same view as was taken by it while answering question N....