DINESH G. VAZIRANI, MUMBAI v. DCIT CEN CIR 46, MUMBAI

ITA 5863/MUM/2009 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 586319914 RSA 2009
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 5863/MUM/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant DINESH G. VAZIRANI, MUMBAI
Respondent DCIT CEN CIR 46, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-12-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 22-12-2010
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 04-11-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL AM AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO JM ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2002-2003 ITA NOS.5862/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2003-2004 ITA NOS.5863/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2004-2005 ITA NOS.5864/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2005-2006 ITA NOS.5865/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2006-2007 ITA NOS.5866/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2007-2008 SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI 2 ND FLOOR RUSI HOUSE DARABSHAW LANE OFF NEPEAN SEA ROAD MUMBAI 400 006. PA NO.AADPV9691H. VS. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 46 MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS.5859/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2003-2004 ITA NOS.5860/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2004-2005 SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI 2 ND FLOOR RUSI HOUSE DARABSHAW LANE OFF NEPEAN SEA ROAD MUMBAI 400 006. PA NO.AAEPV6955H. VS. THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 46 MUMBAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : S/SHRI RAKESH JOSHI & ADITYA B.NEMAN I RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.SENTHIL KUMAR O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS BATCH OF EIGHT APPEALS BY TWO CONNECTED BUT DIFFERENT ASSESSEES RELATES TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-2003 TO 2007-2008. SINCE A LL THE APPEALS ARE BASED ON SIMILAR FACTS AND COMMON GROUNDS OF APPEAL WE ARE THEREFORE PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 FO R ARGUMENTS. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH A ND SEIZURE ACTION U/S.132(1) ON SAFFRON GROUP ON 17.04.2007. THE ASSESSEE IS PROMOT ER OF SEVERAL COMPANIES IN ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 2 THIS GROUP. ACTION U/S.132(1) WAS ALSO TAKEN ON TH E ASSESSEE SIMULTANEOUSLY. NOTICE U/S.153A WAS ISSUED IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED A RETURN WITH TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1 01 81 919. IT IS IN CONTRAST TO THE TOTAL INCOME DECLARED ORIGINALLY BY THE ASSESSEE AT RS6 80 13 797. THUS THERE WAS DECLINE IN THE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN PURSUANT TO NOT ICE U/S 153A. SIMILAR POSITION PREVAILED IN EARLIER YEARS AS WELL BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED LOWER INCOME IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A VIS--VIS THAT SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL RETURNS U/S 139. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT AS PER THE ORIGINAL R ETURNS FOR THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF ART WORK AS UNDER:- ASST.YEAR SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN 2002-03 3 05 330 9 03 309 2003-04 5 83 765 17 80 614 2004-05 4 18 738 1 15 722 2005-06 1 37 033 27 84 832 2006-07 75 660 43 38 475 2007-08 18 48 759 5 60 00 461 3. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COUR SE OF PROCEEDINGS U/S.153A THAT HE HAD MADE SALE OF PERSONAL EFFECTS AND HENCE THERE WAS NO LIABILITY TO PAY CAPITAL GAIN TAX WHICH WAS EARLIER INADVERTENTLY P AID. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE INCOME GIVEN AS PER ORIGINAL RETURNS OF INCOME BE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT U/S.153A THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT HE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS AN ARDENT ART COLLECTOR CON SISTING MAINLY OF PAINTINGS AND SCULPTURES. IN THE PAST STARTING FROM 1997 WHENEV ER HE SOLD ANY ARTWORK HE DULY PAID THE SHORT TERM / LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS ON TH E SAME. RETURNS WERE FILED AND ACCORDINGLY TAXES WERE PAID. IT WAS ARGUED THAT HE WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT SALE OF ARTWORK AT A PROFIT WOULD ATTRACT CAPITAL G AIN WHICH WAS NOT BASED ON CORRECT APPRECIATION OF LAW. IT WAS ALSO CLAIMED THAT THE D EFINITION CAPITAL ASSET U/S.2(14) HAS UNDERGONE CHANGE BY THE FINANCE ACT 2007 WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2008 AS PER WHICH PAINTINGS SCULPTURES OR WORK OF ART HAVE BEE N EXCLUDED FROM THE MEANING OF ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 3 PERSONAL EFFECTS. IT WAS THEREFORE PUT FORTH T HAT THE PROFIT FROM THE SALE OF ART- WORK ORIGINALLY SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS TAXABLE UN DER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS ON A MISINTERPRETATION OF THE LEGAL POSITION IN LAW WAS NOT CORRECT AND SUCH ITEMS BEING PERSONAL EFFECTS IN THIS CASE WERE NOT LIABLE TO BE SUBJECTED TO TAX. THE A.O. DID NOT ACCEPT THE ASSESSEES VERSION ON THE GROUND TH AT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE WERE INVOLVED IN THE ACTIVITY OF INVESTING IN THE ART MA RKETS. THEY HAD FLOATED CERTAIN COMPANIES INCLUDING M/S.PLANETSAFFRON.COM INDIA PVT . LTD. AND M/S.SAFFRON ART PVT.LTD. WHERE THEY WERE THE DIRECTORS AND WERE REC EIVING HUGE SALARIES. SUCH COMPANIES WERE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SELLING O F ARTWORK. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE CAPITAL GAIN OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ORIGINAL RETURNS OF INCOME WAS CORRECT AND THERE WA S NO CASE FOR PUSHING SUCH AMOUNT OF INCOME OUT OF THE AMBIT OF TAXABILITY IN THE RETURN FILED U/S.153A. NO RELIEF WAS ALLOWED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE ABOVE STATED FACTS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE AS SESSEE HAD ORIGINALLY SHOWN SHORT TERM / LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON THE SALE OF ARTWOR K. HOWEVER PURSUANT TO SEARCH ACTION THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURNS FILED U/S.153A CLAIMED THAT THESE WERE PERSONAL EFFECTS SALE OF WHICH DID NOT ATTRACT ANY TAXABILI TY. AT THIS JUNCTURE IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO NOTE THE DEFINITION OF CAPITAL ASSET U/ S.2(14) AS PER WHICH CAPITAL ASSET MEANS PROPERTY OF ANY KIND HELD BY AN ASSESSEE WHE THER OR NOT CONNECTED WITH HIS BUSINESS OR PROFESSION BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE INTER ALIA PERSONAL EFFECTS THAT IS TO SAY MOVABLE PROPERTY HELD FOR PERSONAL USE BY THE ASSES SEE OR ANY MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY DEPENDENT ON HIM BUT EXCLUDES INTER ALIA DRAWINGS PAINTINGS OR ANY WORK OF ART. THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE FINANCE ACT 2007 WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2008. THE EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TH AT ANY PROFIT ON THE TRANSFER OF CAPITAL ASSET IN THE SHAPE OF DRAWINGS PAINTINGS O R WORK OF ART IS NOW CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS. IN THE PRE-AMENDE D SECTION 2(14) THE EXCLUSION FROM THE AMBIT CAPITAL ASSET WAS INTER ALIA OF PERSONAL EFFECTS EXCLUDING JEWELLERY ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 4 HELD BY THE ASSESSEE FOR PERSONAL USE BY THE ASSESS EE OR ANY MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY DEPENDENT ON HIM. BY THE AMENDMENT CARRIED OUT WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2008 DRAWINGS PAINTINGS AND ANY WORK OF ART HAVE BEEN T AKEN OUT OF THE PURVIEW OF `PERSONAL EFFECTS AND HAVE BECOME CAPITAL ASSETS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAIN ON THEIR TRANSFER. IN THE PRE-AMEN DMENT ERA WHICH IS THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION PERSONAL EFFECTS WERE NOT CAPITAL A SSETS AND ANY PROFIT FROM THEIR TRANSFER COULD NOT HAVE BEEN CHARGED TO TAX UNDER T HE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS. PERSONAL EFFECTS HAVE BEEN DEFINED AS ANY MOVABLE PROPERTY INCLUDING WEARING APPAREL BUT EXCLUDING JEWELLERY HELD FOR PERSONAL USE BY THE AS SESSEE OR ANY MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY DEPENDENT ON HIM. THUS IF A PERSON HOLDS ANY WORK OF ART PAINTING ETC. AS HIS PERSONAL EFFECTS THE PROFIT ON ITS TRANSFER BE FORE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 CANNOT BE CHARGED UNDER THE HEAD `CAPITAL GAINS. HOWEVER THE NECESSARY CONDITION SHOULD BE THAT THE DRAWINGS PAINTINGS OR WORK OF ART SHOULD BE HELD AS PERSONAL EFFECTS AND NOT AS INVESTMENT OR STOCK I N TRADE. IF HOWEVER AN ASSESSEE PURCHASES DRAWINGS PAINTINGS OR WORK OR ART ETC. W ITH AN INTENTION TO SELL THEM IMMEDIATELY (TREATING IT AS STOCK IN TRADE) OR AT A LATER DATE (TREATING IT AS INVESTMENT) THE PROFIT ARISING THERE FROM WOULD BE CHARGEABLE TO TAX EVEN PRIOR TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009. THE THING TO BE SEEN IS THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF ACQUISITION OF SUCH ITEMS OF WORK OF AR T ETC. IF THE ATTENDING CIRCUMSTANCES AT THE TIME OF PURCHASE OR THE CON DUCT OF THE ASSESSEE SUGGEST THAT THERE WAS INTENTION TO SELL SUCH WORK OF ART THEN IT WOULD SHED THE CHARACTER OF PERSONAL EFFECTS AND BECOME CAPITAL ASSET. 5. NOW WE NEED TO EXAMINE AS TO WHETHER THE PAINTIN GS OR WORK OF ART SOLD BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES CAN BE HELD AS PERSONAL EFFECTS. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN H.H.MAHARAJA RANA HEMANT SINGHJI VS. CIT [(1976) 103 ITR 61 (SC)] HAS HELD THAT AN INTIMATE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE E FFECTS AND THE PERSON OF THE ASSESSEE MUST BE SHOWN TO EXIST TO RE NDER THEM PERSONAL EFFECTS . SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE HONBLE MADRAS H IGH COURT IN CWT VS. ARTI ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 5 GOENKA [(1980) 121 ITR 632 (MAD.)] . THE HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. AMMINI VAROO (SMT.) [173 ITR 57 (KER.)] HELD THAT THE PERSONAL EFFECTS MUST BE SUCH ITEMS WHICH ARE NORMALLY COMMONLY OR ORDINARI LY INTENDED FOR SUCH USE BY THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE ABOVE JUDGEMENTS IT CAN BE D EDUCED THAT IN ORDER TO CATEGORIZE ANY ASSET AS PERSONAL EFFECTS IT IS SINE QUA NON THAT THERE MUST BE INTIMATE CONNECTION BETWEEN THAT ITEM AND THE ASSES SEE AS A PERSON. IF IT IS INTENDED TO BE RETAINED BY THE ASSESSEE OR ANY MEMB ER OF HIS FAMILY FOR PERSONAL USE THEN IT WOULD ASSUME THE CHARACTER OF PERSONA L EFFECT. IF HOWEVER THE CIRCUMSTANCES DEPICT THAT THE ITEM OF ASSET WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE USED BY THE ASSESSEE AS SUCH BUT THE OBJECT OF TRANSFERRING IT AT A LATER DATE EXISTED AT THE INITIAL STAGE ITSELF THEN THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE ASSE T AND PERSONAL EFFECT WOULD CEASE. 6. ADVERTING TO THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE IT IS NOTED THAT BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIFE THE OTHER ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT BATCH O F APPEALS ARE PROMOTERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANIES NAMED ABOVE. ON A PERTI NENT QUERY ABOUT THE NATURE OF BUSINESS DONE BY THESE COMPANIES THE LEARNED AR IN ITIALLY STATED THAT THE COMPANIES WERE ENGAGED ONLY IN THE BUSINESS OF COMM ISSION AGENCY FROM THE SALE OF ART WORK THROUGH THEIR WEBSITE. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS NO OUTRIGHT PURCHASE OR SALE MADE BY THESE COMPANIES. THE LD. AR WAS DIRECTED TO FILE TRADING PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE S HEETS OF THESE COMPANIES WHICH HAVE BEEN FILED. THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BA LANCE SHEET OF M/S.PLANETSAFFRON.COM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31.03.2007 IS AVAILABLE IN PAPER BOOK PAGE H-23 ONWARDS. FROM THE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IT IS DISCERNIBLE THAT INCOME UNDER THE H EAD SALES AND SERVICES HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS.89 32 44 271. WHEN WE GO TO THE DETAILS OF THIS FIGURE IN SCHEDULE G IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOUNT OF SALE OF PAINTINGS IS RS.88 79 85 425. THIS INDICATES THAT M/S.PLANETSOFFRON.COM INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE SALE AND PURCHASE OF PAINTINGS UNDER ITS OWN NAME AND NO T DOING COMMISSION BUSINESS ONLY THROUGH ITS WEBSITE. APART FROM THAT IT IS FUR THER NOTED THAT THE COMPANY HAS ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 6 CLOSING STOCK OF RS.2.18 CRORES. WHEN THE LEARNED A.R. WAS CONFRONTED WITH THESE FACTS HE CANDIDLY ACCEPTED THAT THIS COMPANY IS AL SO DOING THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF ARTWORK FOR LAST MANY YEARS. THE BALANC E SHEET OF OTHER COMPANY M/S.SAFFRON ART PRIVATE LIMITED IS AVAILABLE IN PAP ER BOOK PAGE G-25 WHEREFROM IT CAN BE SEEN THAT ITS MAJOR SOURCE OF INCOME IS SERV ICE CHARGES FOR SALE OF ARTWORK. FROM THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES OF THESE TWO COMPANIES IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTOR AMPLY DEMONSTRATE THAT THESE ARE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF ARTWORK AS WELL AS ARE HAVING WEBSITE T HROUGH WHICH THE ARTWORK IS SOLD ON COMMISSION BASIS. WITH THIS BACKGROUND OF T HE COMPANIES IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS A DIRECTOR WE SHALL EXAMINE THE FACTS O F ASSESSEE HIMSELF. 7. THE LEARNED A.R. WAS REQUIRED TO PLACE ON RECORD DETAILS OF ALL THE PURCHASE AND SALE TRANSACTION CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 THE ASSESSEE SOLD 17 PAINTS / ARTWORK IN A.Y. 2006-2007 - 13 IN A.Y. 2005-2006 - 21 IN A.Y. 2004- 2005 - 12 IN A.Y. 2003-2004 - 31 AND IN A.Y. 2002- 2003 THE ASSESSEE SOLD 16 PAINTINGS / ARTWORK. THE AMOUNT OF GAIN EARNED BY T HE ASSESSEE IN THE YEARS IN QUESTION HAS BEEN REPRODUCED ABOVE WHICH IS TO THE TUNE OF AROUND RS.5.78 CRORES IN A.Y. 2007-08 ALONE. WHEN WE CONSIDER THE AVAILA BLE PAINTINGS OWNED BY THE ASSESSEE OVER THE YEARS AT THE END OF EACH YEAR WORTH SEVERAL CRORES THE MAGNITUDE OF INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE CAN BE VERY WELL IMAGINED. IT IS MORE INTERESTING IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS OTHERWISE A DIRECTOR IN THE COMPANIES HAVING PALTRY SALARY INCOME IN COMPAR ISON WITH THE AMOUNT OF INCOME FROM THE TRANSFER OR HOLDING OF SUCH PAINTIN GS. THE LEARNED A.R. WAS SPECIFICALLY REQUIRED TO STATE MODUS OPERANDI OF E ACH PURCHASE AND SALE DONE BY THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH NECESSARY EVIDENCE. NO SUC H DETAILS EXCEPT PAGE C-18 OF THE PAPER BOOK HAS BEEN FILED WHICH CONTAINS THE DETAIL OF PURCHASE AND SALE ITEM DEVOID OF NECESSARY EVIDENCE. FROM THIS CHART ITSEL F IT CAN BE SEEN THAT ALL THE SALE TRANSACTIONS EFFECTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS YEAR TOTALING TO RS.6.54 CRORES HAVE ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 7 BEEN EFFECTED THROUGH THE COMPANY I.E. M/S.SAFFRON ART PRIVATE LIMITED IN WHICH HE IS DIRECTOR. THERE IS NO DISCLOSURE ABOUT THE SO URCE OF PURCHASE OF SUCH PAINTINGS. THE LEARNED A.R. POINTED OUT THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS PUTTING UP ITS PAINTINGS ON WEBSITE OF M/S.SAFFRON ART PRIVATE LIM ITED FOR THE PURPOSE OF SALE AND WHENEVER SOME GOOD CUSTOMER WAS FOUND THE SALE WAS EFFECTED FOR PURCHASING ANOTHER PAINTINGS ETC. THESE FACTS AMPLY BELIE THE THEORY OF PERSONAL EFFECTS AS THE ITEMS MEANT FOR PERSONAL USE ARE NOT DISPLAYED ON T HE WEBSITE FOR SALE. ON TAKING AN OVERALL VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS IT CAN BE SAFELY IN FERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CONTINUOUSLY PURCHASING AND SELLING PAINTINGS / ART WORK THROUGH THE WEBSITE OF THE COMPANY IN WHICH HE IS A DIRECTOR WITH THE INTENTIO N OF RESALE AND THE INGREDIENTS OF `PERSONAL EFFECTS ARE LACKING. WE ARE NOT ON THE Q UESTION AS TO WHETHER THE PURCHASE OF PAINTINGS / ARTWORK WAS HIS STOCK IN T RADE OR INVESTMENT BUT CERTAINLY IT WAS NOT PERSONAL EFFECTS. WHEN THE VERY OBJECT WHICH HAS COME OUT FROM THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE AND OTHER ATTENDING CIRCUMS TANCES WAS TO PURCHASE THE PAINTINGS / ARTWORK AND SELL IT OVER A PERIOD THE SE CANNOT BY ANY STANDARD BE CATEGORIZED AS `PERSONAL EFFECTS. THE POSITION BE COMES MORE CLEAR WHEN WE VIEW IT IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE COMPANY IN WHI CH HE IS DIRECTOR IS ALSO ENGAGED IN THE SAME BUSINESS AND THE ASSESSEES WIFE WHO IS TH E OTHER ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT BATCH OF APPEALS IS ALSO ENGAGED IN THE SAME ACTIVI TY. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED A.R. FOR TREATING PAINTIN GS / ARTWORK AS PERSONAL EFFECTS NOT AMOUNTING TO CAPITAL ASSET WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(14) IS DEVOID OF ANY MERITS. WE THEREFORE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN INCLUDING THE AMOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN / SHORT TERM C APITAL GAIN AS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ORIGINAL RETURNS IN THE ASSESSMENT S MADE U/S.153A. THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS THEREFORE UPHELD FOR THE REASONS SET OUT ABOVE. 8. BOTH THE SIDES ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OTHER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ASSESSEES WIFE SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI ARE MUTATIS MUTANDIS SIMILAR TO THOSE DISCUSSED ABOVE. FOLLOWING OUR VI EW WE HOLD THAT THE ITA NOS.5861/MUM/2009 & ORS. SHRI DINESH G.VAZIRANI & SMT.MINAL D.VAZIRANI. 8 PROFIT ON SALE OF PAINTINGS / ARTWORK ETC. IN THE I NSTANT CASES IS LIABLE TO BE TAXED UNDER THE HEAD `CAPITAL GAINS AS HAS BEEN DONE BY THE A.O. 9. IN THE RESULT ALL THE APPEALS STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 22 ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2010. SD/- SD/- ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) ( R.S.SYAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACC OUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI : 22 ND DECEMBER 2010. DEVDAS* COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CENTRAL-II MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI.