CIT, PATIALA vs. AMRINDER SINGH

PDF · subscribers

ITR/12/1994HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01024684199414 August 2013Author: MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON,MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA2 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the reference should be answered in terms of the Full Bench judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala versus Raja Malwinder Singh, Patiala (supra), decided on 28.1.2011. The reasoning is that the counsel for the respondent (assessee) could not urge any legal principle to distinguish the Full Bench judgment and arrive at a different conclusion. Therefore, the Tribunal's conclusion that no capital gain was leviable on the transfer of agricultural land due to the inability to determine its cost of acquisition, as per the cited Full Bench decision, was upheld. The operative direction is to answer the reference in line with the Full Bench judgment.

What were the facts?

This case involves a reference made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, to the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The reference concerns the assessment of capital gains on the transfer of agricultural land. The core factual dispute, as presented in the reference, revolves around the determination of the cost of acquisition of this agricultural land. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala, is challenging the ITAT's conclusion that no capital gain was leviable due to the inability to determine the cost of acquisition. The respondent is Shri Amarinder Singh, a resident of Patiala.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in concluding that no capital gain was leviable on the transfer of agricultural land as the cost of acquisition of the same was not capable of determination? (Question of law). The Revenue's contention is that the reference should be answered in terms of a Full Bench judgment of the same High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala versus Raja Malwinder Singh, Patiala (ITR Nos. 578 and 579 of 1995), decided on 28.1.2011. The Respondent (assessee) attempted to distinguish the Full Bench judgment but was unable to present any legal principle that would support a contrary opinion.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Income Tax Reference Nos.12 and 13 of 1994 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITR Nos. 12 and 13 of 1994 Date of Decision: 14.8.2013 The Commissioner of Income-Tax Patiala ...Revenue versus Shri Amarinder Singh, New Moti Bagh Palace, Patiala. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON Present: Ms. Savita Saxena, Advocate, for the revenue. Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the respondent. RAJIVE BHALLA, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, has forwarded the following reference:- “ Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in coming to the conclusion that no capital gain was leviable on transfer of agricultural land as the cost of acquisition of the same was not capable of determination?” Counsel for the revenue states that a similar reference in “The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala versus Raja Malwinder Singh, Patiala” (ITR Nos. 578 and 579 of 1995) has already been answered by a Full Bench on 28.1.2011. It is prayed that the reference, in hand, may be answered in terms of the Full

Bench judgment. Varinder Kumar 2013.08.19 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Income Tax Reference Nos.12 and 13 of 1994 2 Counsel for the respondent, despite an attempt to distinguish the Full Bench judgment, is unable to urge any legal principle that would enable us to record an opinion contrary to the Full Bench. The reference, in hand, is answered in terms of judgment in “The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala versus Raja Malwinder Singh, Patiala, (supra), decided on 28.1.2011. ( RAJIVE BHALLA ) JUDGE ( DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON ) 14.8.2013 JUDGE VK Varinder Kumar 2013.08.19 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →