COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. MALLIKA SARABHAI TRUST NO.31

ITR/336/1992HC GujaratGJHC24015676199201 March 2006Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.A.PUJ3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

This case involves an Income Tax Reference filed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Revenue) against Mallika Sarabhai Trust No. 31 (Assessee). The reference was made at the instance of the Revenue under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'A'. The core issue pertains to the taxability of shares, debentures, and bonds received by the assessee from amalgamated companies. The Revenue challenged the Tribunal's finding that receiving these assets did not constitute a 'transfer' under Section 2(47) of the Act, and therefore, no capital gains tax was leviable.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Gujarat declined to answer the question referred for its opinion. The Court noted that a similar issue had been decided in the case of CIT v. Leena Sarabhai (N.CH), (1996) 221 ITR 520. In that precedent, the Court had declined to answer questions referred at the instance of the revenue on the ground that in such types of cases, there is no transfer of capital assets within the meaning of Section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Following this established position, the Court found it unnecessary to answer the question in the present reference. Therefore, the operative direction was to dispose of the reference without answering the question.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that when the assessee received shares, debentures and bonds of amalgamated companies, there was no transfer under section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act and consequently no capital gains tax could be charged? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee. However, the Tribunal's decision, which the Revenue is challenging, implies the assessee argued that the receipt of shares, debentures, and bonds from amalgamated companies did not amount to a 'transfer' as defined under Section 2(47) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, thus precluding capital gains tax. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue, by filing the reference, contended that the Tribunal erred in holding that there was no transfer and consequently no capital gains tax was chargeable. The Revenue likely argued that the transaction should be construed as a transfer for the purpose of capital gains tax.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 2(47),Section 256(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITR/336/1992 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 336 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ ============================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ============================================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Applicant(s)

Versus MALLIKA SARABHAI TRUST NO.31 - Respondent(s) ============================================================== Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, MR BD KARIA for MR RK PATEL for Respondent(s) : 1, ================================================================== CORAM :  HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ Date : 01/03/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL R

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 2(47)

All 831 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(47) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →