2017 (3) TMI 528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bove, at Para 12.1 sustained the addition made in the sum of Rs. 15,79,809/- being transfer of machinery by the Individual to his HUF appellant, allegedly assessable under section 56 (2) of the Act. 2. The Hon'ble ITAT adumbrated the arguments placed on behalf of the appellant, tracing the history of the legislations seeking to tax transfers between non-relatives under section 56(2)(vii) and verbatim reproduced, inter-alia, the most salient proviso to the said section at page 6, Para 5 as under:- Provided further that this clause shall not apply to sum of money or any Property received- (emphasis mine) (a) From any relative, 3. The Hon'ble ITAT at page 5, Para 10.1 concluded the arguments made on behalf of the appellant as und....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed to consider the argument raised by the appellant that, despite the misunderstanding of the provisions of section 56(2) by the CIT (A), relating to movable V s immovable properties, the transaction is still exempt under section 56(2)(vii), as it was still not assessable by virtue of transactions between relatives (Please see Para 10.1 at last 3 lines of IT AT order beginning with the words "In any event.. "). 5. In addition the Hon 'ble IT AT omitted to adumbrate on the argument advanced by the appellant, that in the absence of the term "machinery" under the definition of property, there is no mandate to tax the same in terms of section 56 (2) (vii) - (please see Para 10.1, line nos. 5 to 10). 6. The Hon'ble ITAT has omitted to....