COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. FAIZ MURTAZA ALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal preferred by the Revenue, the following substantial questions of law are proposed on which we have heard the arguments at length at the stage of admission itself :

(2.) THE aforesaid questions have arisen for consideration on the following set of facts.

(3.) THE AO was of the view that the aforesaid items could not be treated as personal effects and were in fact capital assets within the meaning of S. 2(14) of the IT Act and, therefore, refused to grant any exemption on the sale proceeds thereof from tax and included this amount for the purpose of tax. Another reason given by the AO was that the assessee had failed to establish the identity of the items sold individually to each buyer or that these items have market value of Rs. 39.47 lakhs. According to him, since the assessee had not produced any documentary evidence in support of his claim, he was not able to establish the genuineness of his claim for exemption under S. 2(14) of the Act. This was the additional ground on which he rejected the plea of exemption under S. 2(14) of the Act.