Delhi H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding Sarvashri Sent Bir Singh, Shiv Bir Singh and Amar Bir Singh were co-owners of the properties at 6, Jor Bagh, and C-27-28, South Extension, New Delhi, since 1974-75?

High Court Of Delhi

CIT vs. Sant Bir Bros.

Section 45

Asst. Year 1976-77

Arijit Pasayat, C.J. & D.K. Jain, J.

IT Ref. No. 185 of 1983

9th October, 2001

Counsel Appeared

R.C. Pandey & Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, for the Petitioner

JUDGMENT

BY THE COURT :

Following question have been referred for opinion of this Court under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘D’, Delhi (in short ‘Tribunal’) :

(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding Sarvashri Sent Bir Singh, Shiv Bir Singh and Amar Bir Singh were co-owners of the properties at 6, Jor Bagh, and C-27-28, South Extension, New Delhi, since 1974-75?

(2) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the capital gains arising on account of sale of property at C-27-28, South Extension, New Delhi, is taxable equally amongst the three co-owners and not in the hands of the assessee-firm?” The dispute relates to the asst. yr. 1976-77.

2. Tribunal while deciding the appeal took note of the fact that on the question of grant of registration for several years the conclusions were to be dependent upon the facts and situation prevailing. For the assessment year in question, the income from sale of property was held to be income from capital gains and, therefore, was to be taxed in the hands of the co-owners separately to the extent of their 1/3rd share each and not in the hands of the firm. The conclusions of the Tribunal are essentially factual and do not give rise to any question of law. We accordingly decline to answer the question referred.

Reference is accordingly disposed of.

[Citation : 257 ITR 673]

Malcare WordPress Security