} {By $3; z§s.,%v éfisvagéfiam, ABV.)
, =.__":s€;scHE§e:;caLirzmsrrezfis
'cozxzsuimaa BUREAU
' Ti=:\:;._o'?;'239:, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM LAYGUT
V V Tag:m:.ALoRE-550 03:3.
my Sri: 4:: re PANBST, ADV.)
IN THE HIGH Comm' 0;' KARNATAKA AT BAI€G,_é4i,V(V}§'§:'»_1§._Vv
DATES THIS THE 8TH DAY OF MARcH,%:éjd':{;',1'}:%--: ji .
FRESENT _ V V
THE Hor»I'13L1': MR. .JUs'r1c:§ Iai.:§-.';.42'§,.r}f'«=';i4'%Ea}.T.':,I4X§}%;:'§;i4i~ ;_ '
fig?' . , . _
Tm, H<:m'31,1.: MRS. Jusfiéfi .Q_.v.réA<é}=.z*éAfia§:zA
amwmre: V M
C R BEEILQE-?J{3"'--.__ J
QUEEN-£-3 wasp 3 V
saw GALOM: A' j;
1.
THE cQ:§é,MI§’;S1c;:é13R11_;§:3a’:vii:’é*AX
Ev
THE mE:;?i,:”If¥ comhszsslazsgsg
GE’ 12~4′<::0M_£a' TAX». * '
cI;::CL13~z3{1;__
('3 R E::m,nIN'<;.., A
QUEESNSAPOAD
-BAN–GAL’i3RE..«
“.APPELLANTS
“.RES?OfiDENT
{*3
rm gm ufS.2Cr{}–A of I.’}’.Act, 1961 ai”iSiJ1g t3*§1″1i.,_0f
Order dated 26-0′?-:2{)t35 passed i13.I’I’A Ne. 1381/5333] 2004
fear the Assessmemt Year 1999-00, praying t1i1E1f~’fjJ§€§”§–.§:C}’11§:*§5′:E¥”§’ +-
Court may bé Rlsascd to; ‘ 3
i. formulate tha substantial questiqns of’}a*,3s?”st9Qi€dM__£ii1c’r¢i11,, A’
allow the appeal and set asids”1t£1é:_A_é:tdcf’}j1;a;s5cc!_
ITAT Baugaiam in {TA N0. 1,581/3a11g/’20o4TV.va-gtegeci 2c}~<}?-
2005 confirming the €JI'CI !5l"TvF"}"3'£3.SC(iV. by V
C-Oiiilllifisififiél' cenfirm the or7ée._r 3:)ass€xii~ ttif: Deputy
Commissioner of Incnmet Ta.x,V.V-ffiizxfiics-8(1), Ba11lgi3.lca':9e, in the
interest ofjustiee and éqfiigiy. V .. "
This {TA __C01::1m’g.. this day,
NAGARA7HzvA_J_,¢’d:;fiv¢;ed? rqnomg
% % k%%%%,r;.._.._zi%::>..% a _,M%,I.:1z.t;.:::%
‘ii-1:t~’:.. viievenua by challenging the
Olflfii” &3.te–e:i’ in §TA.No.b3j the Enwmfi “fax
Appeflaté ‘F_rjfb”u 95:1’,
2«.._ ” leading to the ffling 9:” this appeal mt that the
L’i*€s*f:;31:1€it:i:it.V. amassed in the stains <31' a firm, £31' tha
as§é:§$m}gé.fit-. jfear 1§99~=2OOQ, had fileci its mmrn Bf iiifzfililft,
u ""–. V."iL3qAE£1V'_1:33."§.i.1;"E," La sum of Rs.21,9'?,11i}/-. Far '£316 wit}. asgczssment
_ ;,?€ar;…:fl1fi assesses had claimed that the eniiré hnsizless hat}.
_Mi_3_;:=:%e;1 said as 3 gaing mascara arid thejsefore, rm «::a;3it.a} tiara: coulfi
ha }fi:Vi€{3 in respect of the said salsa considerafiaxa lwfiived by
111% assessmae. "=€3W'€'§.?€§,[", the AS$€$S§.{1g Gficer 13-B. axamination Clf
ihé sxzaiesrial 0:1 i'fiG0i'Cl heki '£3131; Elia purch:as:er had appoifiieztl
/i
,-r"
__ 3 _.
an iiiiiépemieixt vahler who hm} valued each and aver}? ittém
wixisch was being said. The total amount was fliifi
purchaser .2:-am} that the entire amcunt 31353 ft?) 13% tax
linder the head of capital gains and he Ltjwted
afifififififift that there was a slump 3313′: »Th& :3S§€4′..’~”‘sfsi§1&1ii to’ L. ‘
13$ camplfitfiri by an order datitd
tlle: said oncier, the assasseé ._;51*z3fm’md ~bss:fb11=: thii
Commissicafier of §fl€:0i’£}§_’: Tax(AbppV§a1sj».§V, However,
confiriiiing ‘tine cmcial’ 0f the C=G111.i31iSSi011€i’
dififki;-Sfid of the ::’;z’:9V.’3’7i?.,_{}'(‘}«?’:%v_. said etsxzdmt was
cliaflésjgfiélv by the assessfie. Thfi
1;1*i¥3:111é§i.«}i€3x:::e7v::§*; ‘z’*i1~xa*::§1’.s»LL=ii:1 hmxziers pé””:1$$ft(} by the said two
authm:iti&s”‘~«3mi V315-,1d,t11s:it the é’,11’t.iI”1:”‘: consiéfirafion was a
‘~ }11£7,’if}$§}1j}§. :~L;11ou1i’t fS,§iT..t«{‘ai1$fEi’i’ii”ig of the business and -thfimfore,
‘§.§;V'<:z311ia:1V";a'2x<f;tA ;i3a_ treated as itenfiseé safe, by its Ofiifif dated
2.f;i~ .’?’V;2€l’z.VG;Z”;~uQ.”L:—- against flfitfi saici under the mvéimm 113431
‘V tiiifi appaeai IfEi$ii1g thé f(3110’Wi,liig substantial question
” V,<s;:;1.m: "
5′.) Whether the trib1ma3 was -tzorrezczt in
kaitling that the sale mack: by the afisessec of its
1311:} and buflsziing, plant mid macliifiexy, assets,
iiahiiifinszs ‘fix?! a 3″‘ party plméhascr for a
cezrizsfséer-asstiarm afizaunt wmiid aznaunt to a slmnp
3316: am} mat afi itfimised 333:: and tharfifom, rm
cagiwi gaifis tax as hem by fissessiiig Gfiatfii’
*2/%
VV 6. Fmaz the aforeaaid clause What is ilatifiéd is that 111133:
Busirtess and the gaodwiff periafitirzg tiwreto (:1et .-.__
sf rhea Iitzbilities specefied 5}: Armexture 4
taken ever by Pramitj and for the riot:-wgfé~z&éié’ ‘
Gbligafiorts (If CXCB mad the betlefits ‘of u
at: licenses, appinvals, :
v;3*0£tII’££(3fS etc, arufl gerwfiifiy fc3;*’:3’mfi¢2
and peqforvmu-toe fzf the u’:1.:§:1:V:A££2;fifi:)rzs:Eiof
{his agseerzterti $Au3§ie~:’_:bi *~:1frv:€g:f’~r4§1;’ustane:1ts
and cleducfibrts ei§;.., in
this agriézerzfiitf, fie agjjgregéu’e–~”m’? fin:-Iusiue
9]; ‘–v flfiupees two crares
acfiusted as 0:: the
ifwz:”Qfé~:’ with A:1;i1ex”ut’e~6 to
c:g:*ee:”iiénf..——–«Capifaf gains tax, as we?! as :11?
V’ ” jscsléar arid irzzmsfer duties (3i}i’¥.fl€€3f€d with the
. ” £r;¥§;§z%§;5fIe3:;A.§;Ev€P:e said Ezusirmégs arid the said unfit £9
as :72 going maaertz {inc£uc§:’:zg for the
x ‘T .. i§¥Eé:ii.Sf€i” af Efcaeiwe rfgfzts aver the lami amil cf the
rigizfs, arid 5:222:95? £0 :11? buiidinfi, structures,
em, in the Prwctair) shall? be bariw by CICB.’
assets and liabilifizs pertaixiiflg to the b1}.SiJ3.€SS of €136
L
x
N,»
is aismissed. ‘
b1}.Si[1€:SS as a geing C011€:€:r1″1, thé ;*v:$13t3xxde;1t-assessceT’:$.’:a:s net
to complete with the p”i_1i”‘Ch3S€£’ in {he husifless
5316 am} pumilase of carb-fi:1 dioxide for a {sf
‘Tiierefore, the’: intsntian of the puxéfiiéiééez’ T
assesses was to sci} the unit as a as”
indivisibie entity. The fact réfsppgagm “;«;§fs;§ess;ée hag
agreeafl {wt to compate with _[.<):umha*ser: aaf'.::=:;r scald as a
single unit and whicil 'await would mean
that 'diff sale wgs*a_.s1un1p"s$ij§&. " the tribunal was
justifiéd in ff?¥'i3i"Si:A§ig~"'t}1fi'é')i'&¢i'S _§:a:{§:;s€d 15jz the lower authorities
by Ezaiding <§f' fglump $83.1': Within the
izzsaning of ;'£i3%§iJ;);:§y;ne21t of tax on the lzezar}.
Gf cagaital gaiiis Um:1_er the :3-ircuxilstances,
:q1;¢sf:i'u;A)ii raiser} in thig appeal Wank} havfi
ta V}':';–: "e£I§;$V3€i'€3»tT1 the mvexaua atiii accorvdingly, this appeal
3%'
