COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - II vs. RASHMIKABEN K THAKKAR

TAXAP/517/2014HC GujaratGJHC24022439201417 November 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KS JHAVERI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.J.THAKER4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The assessee, Rashmikaben K Thakkar, filed her return of income for Assessment Year 2009-10 on July 31, 2009, declaring a total income of Rs. 5,02,130/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The case was selected for scrutiny, and notices under Section 143(2) and Section 142(1) were issued. After considering the documents, an assessment order was passed. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), which was dismissed. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which allowed the appeal. The Revenue has filed the present Tax Appeal against the ITAT's order.

Held

The Tribunal held that the amount received by the assessee on redemption of 100 Deep Discount Bonds of SSNL should be treated as capital gain, not interest income. The Tribunal found that the issue was covered by the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench in C.S. Gosalla v. ITO. In that case, the Tribunal had held that Deep Discount Bonds are capital assets, and therefore, the profit arising on their redemption is to be treated as capital gain. The Tribunal agreed with this view and allowed the assessee's ground. The Assessing Officer was directed to treat the redemption value less the issue price as capital gain accordingly. The High Court agreed with the Tribunal's order and found no substantial question of law.

Key Issues

1. Whether the amount received by the assessee on redemption of 100 Deep Discount Bonds of SSNL is to be taxed as interest income or long-term capital gain (turning on the classification of the bonds and the nature of the profit). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the ITAT Mumbai Bench in C.S. Gosalla v. ITO, wherein it was held that Deep Discount Bonds are capital assets, and the profit arising on their redemption should be treated as capital gain. Revenue's contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions for the Revenue regarding this issue.

Sections Cited

Section 143(1), Section 143(2), Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

O/TAXAP/517/2014 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 517 of 2014

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

================================================================ 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 - II....Appellant(s) Versus RASHMIKABEN K THAKKAR....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR TEJ SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVER

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.

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.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →