Usmanbhai I Memon v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
High Court
14 Oct 1996 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Usmanbhai I Memon v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Date of order
14 Oct 1996
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Usmanbhai I Memon v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, the High Court (1996) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Thus, so far as question of transfer is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the revenue, but so far as whether it is resulting into capital gain, it is answered in favour of the taxable capital gain.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 161 of 1983
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.M.SONI
And
MR.JUSTICE Y.B.BHATT
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
--------------------------------------------------------------
USMANBHAI I MEMONVersus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR JP SHAH for Petitioner MR BJ SHELAT FOR MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.M.SONI and
MR.JUSTICE Y.B.BHATT
Date of decision: 25/10/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT(Per S.M. Soni J.) 1.�At the instance of the assessee the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench has referred, for our opinion, the following questions:
"1.�Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right
in law in holding that the action under section
147(a) of the Income-tax Act was validly
initiated by the Income-tax Officer?".
"2.�Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right
in law in holding that the date of transfer for
the purpose of determining the liability to the
capital gain should be on date of execution of
the sale deeds and not the date of registration
of the sale deeds?"
"3.�Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right
in law in holding that when a Partner contributed
capital in the form of land to the firm the
transaction amounted to `transfer' within the
meaning of section 2(47) of the Act?"
2.�The assessment year involved is 1974-75. For proper appreciation of the contentions raised by the parties, we reframe the question no.3 as under:
"Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding
that when a partner contributed capital in the
form of land to the firm, the transaction
amounted to transfer within the meaning of
section 2(47) of the Act resulting into taxable
capital."
3.�We would like to consider this third question first. The assessee had entered into a partnership on 7th September 1973 with nine other parties forming a firm styled as "M/s Usmangani & Co.". The business of the new firm was to acquire land and property and sell buildings. The assessee had transferred the land belonging to him in favour of the said firm which according to the assessee did not amount to `transfer' so as to attract capital gains in view of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Hind Construction Limited.
4.�In view of the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Siddharthbhai Vs. CIT (156 ITR 509), the transfer of land belonging to the assessee in favour of the said firm is a `transfer'. The question involved in the said case was of transfer of certain shares and the Supreme Court held:
"In its general sense, the expression "transfer
of property" connotes the passing of rights in
property from one person to another. In one
case, there may be a passing of the entire bundle
of rights from the transferor to the transferee.
In another case, the transfer may consist of one
of the estates only out of all the estates
comprising the totality of rights in the
property. In a third case, there may be a
reduction of the exclusive interest in the
totality of rights of the original owner into a
"In its general sense, the expression "transfer
of property" connotes the passing of rights in
property from one person to another. In one
case, there may be a passing of the entire bundle
of rights from the transferor to the transferee.
In another case, the transfer may consist of one
of the estates only out of all the estates
comprising the totality of rights in the
property. In a third case, there may be a
reduction of the exclusive interest in the
totality of rights of the original owner into a
joint or shared interest with other persons. An
exclusive interest in property is a larger
interest than a share in that property. To the
extent to which the exclusive interest is reduced
to a shared interest, there is a transfer of
interest.
In the instant case on transfer of the property and transfer of the land belonging to the assessee in favour of the firm, the same has become the property of the firm. Thus, the exclusive interest in land is reduced to a shared interest in land. Thus, there is a transfer of
land.
5.�The question is whether the said transfer is
resulting into taxable capital gain or not. In the case of Sunil Siddharthbhai (supra) the Supreme Court held that when an assessee, a partner in a firm, made over to the firm certain shares in a company which were held by him, there was a "transfer" of the shares, but that he received no consideration within the meaning of section 48. Nor did any profit or gain accrue to him for the purpose of section 45. Thus, though there is a transfer, the same is not resulting into capital gain. In view of this legal position, question no.3 as amended is answered
as under:
6.�There is a transfer within the meaning of section 2(47) of the Act, but the transfer is not resulting into taxable capital gain. Thus, so far as question of transfer is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the revenue, but so far as whether it is resulting into capital gain, it is answered in favour of the
taxable capital gain. Thus, so far as question of transfer is concerned, the question is answered in favour of the revenue, but so far as whether it is resulting into capital gain, it is answered in favour of the assessee. Thus the question is answered accordingly.
7.�In view of our answer to question no.3 we are of the opinion that question nos.2 and 3 have rmained academic and we need not answer the same.
8.�This reference stands disposed of accordingly.
**********
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.