TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (8) TMI 671
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the statement of the assessee recorded during survey proceedings, wherein the assessee stated to have sold the mine, allotted to him in the year 1988-89, in the year under consideration, for a sum of ₹ 1.5 lakhs, to M/s. Kothari Marble Industries, Pasoond, and the revenue also challenged the deletion of ₹ 50,000, added on account of unexplained investment in the acquisition of mines at Nijarana, which was deleted on the ground, that the assessee had ₹ 1.5 lakhs with him for such an expenditure, in the absence of any proof on record to show, that the assessee had spent this amount anywhere else. 2. The appeal was admitted by framing two substantial questions of law, on 23-5-2006, reading as under :- "(i) Whether in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., as 'capital gains' earned from transfer of mine, as a capital asset. The learned Tribunal has held, that the mines are definitely the property of the Government, and allotment is made for mining purposes. The right to leasehold vested in the assessee, and the disputed amount was received by the assessee, on the transfer of the leasehold right of the mining. Then it has been found, that the provisions of capital gains were not in vogue during the relevant period. It was found, that the receipt is definitely a capital receipt, on capital asset, but in the absence of such provisions at the relevant time, this was not possible to be taxed, because these provisions came into existence only with effect from 1-4-1998, and therefore, the ....