TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (9) TMI 46
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law arising out of its order dated July 18, 1997, for the assessment year 1981-82 "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the site purchased in 1976 and the building constructed thereafter were different assets for the purpose of capital gains though they had been sold as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... regard to the site he had treated the capital gains as long-term capital gains because there was a gap of more than three years from the date of purchase of the site to the date of sale. With regard to the building, the assessee treated it as short-term capital gains. The Income-tax Officer did not accept this contention. Subsequently, in appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner accepted the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure and would not include site. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the capital gains arising from the sale of land has to be treated as long-term capital gain. This judgment was followed in the case reported in CIT v. Dr. D. L. Ramachandra Rao [1999] 236 ITR 51, by the Madras High Court, where also it was observed that it is not possible to say that by construction ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was a matter of short-term capital gain. The facts of that case are completely distinguishable. The property passes only on its registration and that was the view taken by this court. In respect of every immovable property having a value of more than Rs. 100 there cannot be any transfer of the property unless the sale deed is registered. The lease agreement entered into would not confer any owne....