TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (9) TMI 41
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilverwares during the accounting period in question with special reference to the definition of capital asset ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the statement made by the assessee in the voluntary disclosure could not help him merely because it was his own statement and further that it cannot be said that the same is not binding upon the Department ?" The short facts necessary to be taken note of are that the assessee holds 790 silver items of dinner sets. The question arises is whether the assessee can be subjected to tax on capital gains. The case of the assessee is that the capital assets sold by him were his "personal effects" and excluded from the definition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the case of Jayantilal A. Shah v. K. N. Anantharam Aiyar, CIT [1985] 156 ITR 448, and the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in H. H. Maharani Usha Devi v. CIT [1982] 133 ITR 43. After considering the ratio of the aforesaid cases on the meaning and interpretation of the words "personal effects" which are excluded from the definition of "capital assets" under section 2(14), the Tribunal came to the conclusion that all the silver items of dinner sets being intended for personal use even though occasionally and not frequently, are "personal effects", on the sale of them no tax by way of capital gain is leviable. Even, after holding thus the Tribunal passed an order of remand of the case to the Income-tax Officer with directions "to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... use on ceremonial occasions. This does not deprive such jewellery of its character as jewellery meant for personal use. Heirloom jewellery may be passed down from generation to generation. But it is nevertheless for the personal use of the owner. The frequency of the use of the property must necessarily depend on the nature of the property. Merely because from the nature of the property, it can be used on ceremonial occasions only, it does not follow that the property is not held by the assessee for personal use. The occasion on which the jewellery is used will depend upon the nature of the jewellery. But if it is meant for the assessee's personal use, it will form part of the assessee's personal effects. In the instant case the jewellery ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere in common use. It is submitted that the earlier decision of the Supreme Court in the case of H. H. Maharaja Rana Hemant Singhji v. CIT [1976] 103 ITR 61, on which reliance was placed by the Tribunal, has been approved by the Supreme Court in the case of H. H. Maharani Usha Devi [1998] 231 ITR 793. In the case before us, the items which are described in the order of the Tribunal are all different articles to be used on the dinner table. There are in all 790 pieces of such dinner sets. The silverwares are articles to be used on the dinner table. They were obviously intended for the personal use of the assessee and his family members. That such silver dinner items were not frequently used is a fact totally irrelevant. As held by the Sup....