Case Law Details
Jhonson Electric Company Limited Vs ITO (ITAT Surat)
Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT Vs Ved Prakash & sons (HUF) (supra) held from the bare reading of section 2(42A), the word ‘owner’ has by design not been used by the Legislature. The word ‘held’ as per dictionary meaning means to possess, be the owner, holder or tenant of property, stock, land, etc. Thus, a person could be said to be holding the property as an owner, as a lessee, as a mortgagee or on account of part of performance of agreement, etc. Conversely, all such other persons who may be termed as lessees, mortgagees with possession or persons in possession as part performance of the contract would not in strict parlance come within the purview of an ‘owner’. As per Shorter Oxford Dictionary, ‘owner’ means one who owns or holds something; one who has the right of claim or title to a thing.
In view of the aforesaid factual and legal discussions, we are of the considered view that the assessee was occupying the asset for more than the qualifying period of 36 months and on assigning the right in the property, the gain earned is certainly qualified for LTCG.
The submissions of ld. DR for the revenue that the assessee was not in possession of the asset or that the right to specific performance accrued only in the year 2005 is not correct being contrary to the contents of various clauses the agreements to sale dated 06.04.1994 and the conveyance deed dated 08th May 2007, which we have discussed above. The assessee possessed the property since long and not from the date of making balance payment in the year 2005. It is settled legal position that the contents of documents should not be read in isolation but as a whole.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
