TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (11) TMI 128
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fied in invoking the provision of s. 4(1) (a) of the GT Act in the case of the assessee and value of gift was wrongly determined at Rs. 40,697. 2. Facts pertaining to the issue are in short compass. The assessee with his two brothers owned a property jointly at Rani Jhansi Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana. He transferred his 1/3rd share to his two brother S/Shri Dharam Pal Oswal and Tej Pal Oswal on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the valuation made under the IT Act should not have been relied upon by the Revenue for purposes of deemed gift. He also submitted that in the income tax proceedings assessee has been subjected to capital gains on the basis of the same evaluation in a sum of Rs. 46,050 but when it came before the AAC he deleted the same. On the basis of same reasoning he submitted no gift tax could be levied. He,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re that during the accounting year under consideration the appellant has transferred his 1/3rd share in the residential Kothi situated at Rani Jhansi Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana to his two brothers S/Shri Dharam Pal Oswal and Tej Pal Oswal for a consideration of Rs. 40,000 on 21st August, 1972. The ITO has found that apparently the consideration shown by the appellant was very low and therefore, h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... an other decision quoted in. 4. I have considered the submissions made on behalf of the appellant and have also gone through the decision and hold that provisions 52 are not attracted to the facts and circumstances of this case as the ITO could not prove that any excess consideration has been received by the appellant on transferring of property in question to his two brothers. Therefore, the a....