Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS Respondent: VIMAL LALCHAND MUTHA
Court Name: Bombay High Court Judge(s): Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, R. D. Dhanuka Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs VIMAL LALCHAND MUTHA Case No.: Income-tax Application No,157 of 1988 Date of Judgment:1990-08-07 Reported As: 1992 PTD 915 Result: Rule discharged
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT ' MRS. SUJATA V. MANOHAR, J.---The assessee had entered into an agreement on November 8, 1977, for purchase of a flat on the 11th Floor, 112-A, Mittal Towers, Nariman Point, Bombay, with Bharat Trading Corporation. She entered into a formal agreement with Bharat Trading Corporation on December 4, 1978. She obtained possession of the flat in June, 1981. No conveyance, however, was executed either in her favour or in favour of the co-operative society of the said building or any limited company in respect of the said building. She entered into an agreement dated April 28, 1983, with Chanrai Uttamchand transferring her rights, title and interest in the said flat to Chanrai Uttamchand. The assessee has thus transferred all her rights under the agreement of November 8, 1977, and/or December 4, 1978, in favour of Chanrai Uttamchand by virtue of the agreement dated April 28, 1983 between the assessee and Chanrai Uttamchand. The assessee thus held rights under the said two agreements of November 8, 1977/December 4, 1978, for more than 36 months before transferring the same. The Tribunal has, therefore, rightly come to the conclusion that the capital gains were long-term gains. In view of these facts and the findings recorded by the Tribunal, there is no statable question of law. We, therefore, discharge the rule. ' No order as to costs.
---
## Page 2
revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.