NARENDRA I.BHUVA vs ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,CIRCLE-13, (1)MUMBAI.

Judgment text excerpt

k 1/12 402 itxa 681.2003 db os.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.681 OF 2003 Narendra I. Bhuva ....Appellant versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13, (1), Mumbai ....Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.4204 OF 2022 IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.681 OF 2003 Mehool Narendra Bhuva (Legal Heirs of Original Appellant & Anr. ....Applicants IN THE MATTER BETWEEN Narendra I. Bhuva ....Appellant versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13, (1), Mumbai ....Respondent _________ Mr. Vipul Joshi with Mr. Prashant Ghumare i/b i/b M/s. Namrata S. Kasale for the Assessee-Appellant/Applicants. Mr. Prakash C. Chhotaray with Ms. Sangita Choure for Revenue - Respondent. __________ CORAM: ALOK ARADHE, CJ. & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 14 AUGUST 2025. ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Chief Justice) 1. This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is filed by the Assessee and pertains to assessment year 1992-1993. k Page No. 1 of 12 k 2/12 402 itxa 681.2003 db os.doc The Appeal was admitted on 22 November 2004 by a Bench of this Court on following substantial question of law: “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that vintage car owned by the Appellant was not his personal effect and thus the gain arising on sale thereof was liable to be taxed under the head ‘Capital Gains’? 2. Facts giving rise to filing of this Appeal, in a nutshell, are that the Assessee was an employee of M/s. Indu Nishan Oxo-Chemical Indusries Ltd. and was a salaried employee. The Assessee had income from house property, share income, dividend etc. The Assessee filed the return of income on 28 November 1992 for Assessment Year 1992-1993 declaring a total income of R