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

G.S.PANNU, JOGINDER SINGH
Ram Saroop Saini, (HUF) – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle Rewari – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Smt. Indira Iyer,Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Tarun Kumar, Ashwani Taneja

ORDER

1. We find it convenient to dispose of this bunch of ten cross-appeals by the assessees and the revenue pertaining to respective assessment years as shown in the caption of the order, by this consolidated order.

2. The assessees before us are three HUFs, the Kartas whereof are brothers. The assessments have been framed by treating the sale of land declared by the assessees as adventure in the nature of trade and not as sale of capital asset declared by the assessee. The quantum of income assessed is also in dispute.

3. The background, facts and the dispute leading to the present controversy are identical in respect of all the appeals of three assessees herein. We therefore, consider it appropriate to take up for consideration the controversy in relation to I.T.A. No. 1409/Delhi/05 pertaining to Ram Saroop Saini, HUF. The return of income was filed declaring income of Rs. 2,36,790 plus agricultural income of Rs. 55,400 for the assessment year 2001-02. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee HUF along with other two assessees had got approved their common agricultural land situated near Swami Uma Bharti Public School, Rewari into a Town Planning Scheme No. 9 (in short TPS)

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