In Vikram A Sarabhai Huf T v. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (1996) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption u/s.
Decision: This reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 229 of 1991
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and
MR.JUSTICE R.R.JAIN
============================================================
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?
-------------------------------------------------------------- VIKRAM A SARABHAI HUF T NO 1Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: SERVED for Petitioner
MR MANISH R BHATT for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and
MR.JUSTICE R.R.JAIN
Date of decision: 11/07/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT �At the instance of Assessee, the following question is referred to this Court under Sec. 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act").
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to exemption u/s. 47 (vii) of the Act, 1961 and would be made liable to capital gains tax in the transaction in question ?"
�On the same question, we have disposed of an Income Tax Reference No. 215 of 1990 today and we have answered the question in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee relying on the decision of this Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Gautam Sarabhai Trust No. 31 reported in 173 ITR 216. Accordingly in this case, we hold against the Assessee and in favour of the Revenue. This question is answered accordingly in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee. This reference is disposed of accordingly with no order as to
costs.
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.
EaseValue