Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 1990
  6. /
  7. January

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Suraji Devi Kunji Lal Jaipuria ...

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|10 September, 1990

JUDGMENT / ORDER

JUDGMENT B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.
1. TWO questions are stated under Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.-They are :
"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the respondent assessee, a trust created by the instrument executed on April 24, 1958, is a public charitable and religious trust, and its income is exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 .?
2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amount of difference between the fair market value of the land and the price at which it had been sold could be taxed as a capital gain ?"
2. So far as the first question is concerned, an identical question with respect to the very same trust for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 and 1969-70 was referred to this court in I.T.R. No. 617 of 1977 and has been answered by a Bench of this court in favour of the assessee on August 9, 1990 (CIT v. Surji Devi Kunji Lal Jaipuria Charitable Trust (No. 2) [1990] 186 ITR 745). Following the said decision, the first question is answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
3. So far as the second question is concerned, the order of the Tribunal says that the difference between the fair market value of the assets and the actual consideration was brought to tax under the Gift tax Act. A copy of the gift-tax assessment order was also placed before the Tribunal. Acting upon the same and applying Clause (iii) of Section 47, the Tribunal held that no capital gains tax can be levied upon the said difference amount. The Tribunal followed the decisions of the Delhi, Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka High Courts in preference to the decision of the Kerala High Court. On a reading of Section 47(iii), we are of the opinion that the Tribunal was right in doing so. Accordingly, the second question is also answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
4. No costs.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Suraji Devi Kunji Lal Jaipuria ...

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
10 September, 1990
Judges
  • B J Reddy
  • G Mathur