ASHOK SOI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE ASSESSEE HAS APPROACHED THIS COURT AGAINST THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN ITA.NO. 48/2000, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995- 96, UNDER SECTION 260A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS "THE ACT"). THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF LAW WERE FRAMED BY THE COURT ON 19.09.2000:-

(2.) SO FAR AS QUESTION NO.1 IS CONCERNED, IT REFERS TO TRANSFER OF A PROPERTY BEARING NO.22, DARYA GANJ, NEW DELHI. THE SALE DEED OF THIS PROPERTY WHICH WAS EXECUTED ON 30TH MAY, 1994 IS AT PAGE 93 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IN THE SAID SALE DEED, THE VENDORS-PARTY NO.1 REFERS TO FOUR PERSONS, NAMELY, (1) SHRI ASHOK SOI, THE ASSESSEE, (2) HIS WIFE, SMT BULBUL SOI, (3) SHRI ADITYA SOI, SON OF THE ASSESSEE, AND (4) ANOTHER SON, SHRI ABHAI SOI. THE VENDEE IS M/S P. TEX BUILDER (P) LTD. IN THE SAID SALE DEED, THERE IS A REFERENCE TO ONE SHRI B.M. SOI, FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, AS A CONFIRMING PARTY. THE RECITALS, INTER ALIA, READ AS UNDER:-

(3.) IT IS SPECIFICALLY STATED THEREIN THAT THE PAYMENT TO DEFENDANT NO.2 (IN THE SAID SUIT), NAMELY, SHRI B. N. SOI, THE CONFIRMING PARTY AND FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, AS AFORESAID WAS TO BE MADE IN FULL AND FINAL SETTLEMENT OF ALL HIS CLAIMS. READING THE AFORESAID CLAUSE, IT IS CLEAR THAT SON, DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AND GRAND SONS AGREED TO PAY SOMETHING OUT OF THEIR SHARES OF THE SALE PROCEEDS TO THE CONFIRMING PARTY NOT BECAUSE HE WAS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY BUT TOWARDS SETTLEMENT OF HIS CLAIMS AND NO FURTHER. THE SALE DEED AT PAGE 96 OF THE PAPER BOOK ALSO CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE VENDORS-PARTY- 1 ARE THE ABSOLUTE OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION AND THAT THE VENDORS-PARTY-1 WERE FULLY ENTITLED/EMPOWERED TO DISPOSE OF THE SAME ETC. CLAUSE (4) OF THE SALE DEED IS ALSO REQUIRED TO BE REPRODUCED:-