1981 (3) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual. She filed the return for the accounting period ended on 31st March, 1975; relevant for the asst. yr. 1975-76, and thereby claimed loss of Rs. 19,552 under the head "Capital Gains" on sale of car.  The ITO allowed the claim of the assessee while passing the assessment order under s. 143(3) of the Act for the year under consideration. 3. The CIT, on examination of the assessment records, found that the car was not used for the business purposes and that in the wealth-tax return for the asst. yr. 1975-76, the assessee had claimed a deduction of Rs. 25,000 from the value of the car under s. 5(1)(viii) of the WT Act, 1957, on the footing of a personal asset, that the car being a perso....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se to capital loss or transfer of capital asset and the deficiency in question did not qualify for any set off against assessee's other income as wrongly done by the ITO in the assessment order.  So, he directed the ITO to compute the assessee's income by disallowing and excluding the loss of Rs. 19,552 in accordance with the law. 4. The assessee, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of the CIT, has preferred this appeal. Shri Shirish B. Desai, ld. counsel for the assessee, contends that the CIT, while passing the order under s. 263 of the Act, erred in not allowing the loss of Rs. 19,552 against the other incomes of the assessee on the ground that the sale of the car in question was not a transfer in terms of s. 45 of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssee, on the basis of short-term capital loss on sale of motor car, but the CIT is of the view that it is personal effect on the ground that the assessee had shown it so in the wealth-tax assessment proceedings for the asst. yr. 1974-75, and as such, the assessee cannot change its position. We do not see any force in the stand of the ld. CIT because the wealth-tax proceedings, though the same may be for the same year, are independent and specific and principle of estoppel and res judicata do not apply to the income-tax proceedings, and being so, the assessee cannot be barred to take the said plea as she has taken in the income-tax proceedings. Moreover, the concept of personal effect is different in both the Acts. Now, we have to see indepe....