SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1973 Supreme(Del) 38

D.K.KAPUR, M.R.A.ANSARI
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX – Appellant
Versus
MITHLESH KUMARI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMARJIT SINGH, B.Kirpal, N.D.KARKHAMI, S.P.AGARWAL

M. R. A. ANSARI, J.

( 1 ) THE following question has been REFERRED TO to this Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench a , (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as the Tribunal) under section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as the Act):-

"whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the interest amount of Rs. 16,878. 00 and the ground rent of Rs. 3,793. 00 constituted part of the actual cost of the plot to the assessee for the purpose of determining the capital gain?" The relevant facts as can be gathered from the statement of the case may be briefly stated. On 6-12-1957 Smt. Mithlesh Kumari (hereinafter REFERRED TO to as the assessee) purchased the perpetual lease-hold rights in an open plot of land from one H. R. Gandhi for a consideration of Rs. 95,000. 00. The sale deed, inter alia, provided that in addition to the payment of the price of Rs. 95,000. 00, the assessee shall deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000. 00 either in cash or security on account of building security in the Delhi Improvement Trust within 15 days of the sale deed and that the vendor will be entitled to take back refund of Rs. 5,000. 00 deposited by him with the said aut






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top