1996 (5) TMI 82

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who held that there was no deemed gift in this case ? (2) Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who annulled the gift-tax assessment made under section 15(3) read with section 16(1) of the Gift-tax Act ?" The facts for the purpose of answering these two questions may be narrated as follows : The assessee is the owner of a plot of land measuring 1 bigha, 3 kathas, 1/2 lecha. In the assessment order of gift-tax for the assessment year 1971-72, the Gift-tax Officer, B-Ward, Nagaon, mentioned that the assessee sold the back portion of the land located at Lowkhowa Ro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ale deed and initiated proceedings under section 16 of the Act and completed the assessment of tax taking the value of the property as assessed by the Wealth-tax Officer. After considering the basic exemption under section 4, the balance amount of Rs. 80,310 was, considered as a taxable gift. The assessee brought the matter before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, by order dated March 20, 1986, held that there was no gift. Against that the Revenue approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal also by judgment and order dated July 31, 1989, upheld the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and rejected the appeal. Hence, the present reference at the instance of the Revenue. The Tribunal, while r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ity, it should be deemed that the assessee accepted the same and it became final. For the purpose of section 4 that should be the price and if that was the price, Rs. 15,000 was not the price of the property and in that view of the matter the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and for that matter the decision of the Tribunal were wrong. Dr. Saraf, on the other hand, submits that merely because the Wealth-tax Officer assessed the valuation of the property that cannot be the ultimate finding so far as the gift-tax is concerned. The Gift-tax Officer has to determine the value of the property on his own as indicated under section 6. Dr. Saraf further submits that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner having held that the Assessing ....