CIT v. H.H Maharaja Sahib Shri Lokendra Singhji

YOGESH DAS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

…so distinguished the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Manoharsinhji P. Jadeja's case (supra) as it was based on the principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. H.H. Maharaja Sahib Shri Lokendra Singhji. [1986] 162 ITR 93/25 Taxman 66 (MP), which has already been distinguished in the full bench decision in the case of CIT v. Raja Malwinder Singh (Supra). (vi) It would be appropriate to reproduce here the relevant extracts of the decision of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Thakur Dwara Shri Krishanji Maharaj Handiyaya Vs CIT (Supra) as under: "3.…

SHRI GOPI RAM SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-4, JAIPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

…scertaining the cost does not arise. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Mandhar Singh Ji P. Jadeja 281 ITR 19 as well as Thakur Dwara Shri Krishanju Maharaj Handiyaya, Barnala vs. CIT 162 ITR 93. He has also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in case of CIT vs. Pashu Mohammed Zainuddin 142 TTJ 17. Thus the ld. AR has submitted the land is an ancestral land as accepted by the AO in the assessment order and therefore, when there is no cost of acquisition by the forefathers of the assessee then the capital gain cannot be chargeable to…

UDAI SINGH RATHORE,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

…assumption that where market value cannot be ascertained, capital gain cannot be applied, is not correct being against the statutory scheme. Similarly, the view taken by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in CIT v. H.H. Maharaja Sahib Shri Lokendra Singhji [1986] 162 ITR 93/25 Taxman 66 cannot be accepted. The said judgment also does not give effect to the mandate of section 55(3) which provides for a situation where the value of the asset acquired could not be ascertained. If the market value can be ascertained, it has to be taken to be equal thereto and if the value cannot be ascertained, it has to be equal to the…

RAM LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

…taining the cost does not arise. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT Vs. Mandhar Singh Ji P. Jadeja 281 ITR 19 as well as Thakur Dwara Shri Krishanju Maharaj Handiyaya, Barnala vs. CIT 162 ITR 93. He has also relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in case of CIT vs. Pashu Mohammed Zainuddin 142 TTJ 17. Thus the ld. 7 ITA 522 To 528/JP/17_ Ram Lal Sharma and others Vs. ITO AR has submitted the land is an ancestral land as accepted by the AO in the assessment order and therefore, when there is no cost of acquisition by the forefathers…