| COURT: | ITAT Mumbai |
| CORAM: | D. T. Garasia (JM) |
| SECTION(S): | 2(42A), 2(47), 45, 48 |
| GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
| CATCH WORDS: | capital gains, long-term capital asset |
| COUNSEL: | Nilesh Patel, Viraj Mehta |
| DATE: | February 13, 2017 (Date of pronouncement) |
| DATE: | March 6, 2017 (Date of publication) |
| AY: | 2011-12 |
| FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
| CITATION: | |
| Capital gains: While s. 2(42A) uses the term "held", the other provisions use the terms "acquired", "purchased" and "owner". Accordingly, for considering whether an asset is a "long-term capital asset", the period of holding must be computed on a de facto basis. The letter of allottment, even though not "ownership", must be taken as the date of holding the asset | |
Perusal of the definition of the term “short-term capital asset” in section 2(42A) shows that the legislature has used the expression ‘held’. It is further noted by us that in various other allied or similar sections, the legislature has preferred to use the expression ‘acquired’ or ‘purchased’ e.g. in section 54 / 54F. Thus, it shows that the legislature was conscious while making use of this expression. The expressions like ‘owned’ has not been used for the purpose of determining the nature of asset as short term capital asset or long term capital asset. Thus, the intention of the legislature is clear that for the purpose of determining the nature of capital gain, the legislature was concerned with the period during which the asset was held by the assessee for all practical purposes on de facto basis. The legislature was apparently not concerned with absolute legal ownership of the asset for determining the holding period. Thus, we have to ascertain the point of time from which it can be said that assessee started holding the asset on de facto basis
Recent Comments