JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) BY this reference under section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the act) the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, indore Bench, has referred to this Court the following questions of law Cor its opinion:- " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the capital gains were chargeable to tax in the assessment year 1974-75 ? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the capital gains are chargeable to tax in the year of transfer of capital asset, even though the initial compensation is determined and becomes payable in subsequent year ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the capital gains are chargeable to tax in the year of transfer, even though no gains could be computed under section 48 during that year ? (4) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in extending the analogy of relating the enhanced compensation under specific provision of law, to the year of transfer, to a case of initial compensation without there being any specific provision in that behalf? ( 2. ) THE material facts giving rise to this reference, as set out in the statement of case, are as follows :-The assessee is an individual and the assessment year in question is 1974-75. Parcels of agricultural land owned by the assessee were acquired by the Improvement Trust by Notification dated 9-11-1973 issued under section 71 of the M. P. Town Improvement Trust Act, 1961. On 14-1-1976, the trust informed the assessee that the Trust was willing to pay her a sum of rs. 1,61,840 as compensation. The assessee, however, did not agree to the amount of compensation and hence the matter was referred by the Trust to the Tribunal constituted under M. P. Town Improvement Trust Act. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1974-75, relevant to the accounting year ending on 31-3-1974, the Income Tax Officer proposed to tax capital gains arising out of the acquisition of the aforesaid parcels of agricultural land. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1974-75, relevant to the accounting year ending on 31-3-1974, the Income Tax Officer proposed to tax capital gains arising out of the acquisition of the aforesaid parcels of agricultural land. The assessee objected, inter alia, on the ground that during the assessment year in question, the amount of compensation had not been determined and hence no capital gains could be computed in accordance with the provisions of section 45 of the Act. It was also urged on behalf of the assessee that since the agricultural land became a capital asset only on 1-3-1970, its value as on 1-3-1970 should be taken as envisaged by section 49 (2)of the Act. The Income Tax Officer rejected both these contentions and determined the amount of capital gains on the compensation amount of rs. 1,61,840 by deducting therefrom the value of the land as on 1-1-1954 and further deductions admissible under section 80-T of the Act. Thus, the income chargeable under the head capital gains was determined at Rs. 77,072. The assessee preferred an appeal. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that since the amount of compensation Was determined during the financial year 1975-76, the capital gains could be deemed to have accrued to the assessee only during that year and not during the assessment year 1974-75 when the land in question was acquired by the Improvement Trust. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Department preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal took the view that capital gains were chargeable to tax during the year, in which the transfer took place, and not during the year when the amount of compensation was determined or paid to the assessee. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal allowed the the appeal and remanded the case to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to decide the other questions raised by the assessee. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee sought a reference and it is at the instance of the assessee that the aforesaid questions of law have been referred to this court for its opinion. ( 3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the assessee sought a reference and it is at the instance of the assessee that the aforesaid questions of law have been referred to this court for its opinion. ( 3. ) SHRI Chaudhary, learned counsel for the assessee, contended that section 45 of the Act by the virtue of which capital gains were chargeable to income-tax, had to be read along with Section 48, 54-B and 54-E as all these provisions were parts of an integrated code and as computation of capital gains, as provided by Section 48 of the Act, was not possible till the receipt or accrual of the full value of consideration on account of transfer, which according to the learned counsel accrued to the assessee only on 14-1-1976 when the Improvement Trust made the offer, capital gains in the instant case, could not be had subject to tax during the year of transfer. It was urged that the reliefs granted to the assessee by the provisions of section 54-B and 54-E would be rendered illusory if capital gains were subjected to tax in the year of transfer even though the consideration was received or accrued in sections 54-B and 54-E of the Act, which entitled the assessee to grant of reliefs under their provisions. It was, therefore, contended that capital gains should be held to be chargeable to income-tax during the year of effective transfer when the consideration for transfer accrued to or was received by the assessee. ( 4. ) TO appreciate the contentions urged on behalf of the assessee, it would be necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of law. Section 45 of the Act makes profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset effected in the previous year, chargeable to income-tax. Section 45 of the act further provides that those profits or gains shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year, in which the transfer took place. Section 2 (47)of the Act defines "transfer" in relation to a capital asset as one including compulsory acquisition of that asset. Section 45 of the act further provides that those profits or gains shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year, in which the transfer took place. Section 2 (47)of the Act defines "transfer" in relation to a capital asset as one including compulsory acquisition of that asset. Section 71 (2) of the M. P. Town improvement Trust Act, 1961, provides that on publication of the notification in the Gazette as envisaged by subsection (1) of Section 71, the land shall, on and from the date of such publication, vest absolutely in the trust free from all encumbrances. ( 5. ) THE provisions of Section 71 (2) of the M. P. Town Improvement trust Act make it clear that the title to the land compulsorily acquired vests in the Trust from the date of publication of the notification under section 71 (1) of the Act. As Section 2 (47) of the Act includes compulsory acquisition of land in the expression "transfer", such transfer must be held to have taken place on the date of publication of the notification under Section 71 (1) of the Act. The fiction introduced by the Section 45 of the Act provides the profits or gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset shall be deemed to be the income of the previous year, in which the transfer took place. Accordingly, capital gains have to be assessed in the assessment year corresponding to the previous year, in which the transfer took place. In the instant case, the transfer took place on 9-11-1973 when the notification under section 71 (1) of the M. P. Town Improvement Trust Act, 1961 was published. Therefore, that is the date when the transfer was effected. The date, when the consideration for transfer was received or accrued is not relevant for purpose of determining the year of charge ability on account of the fiction introduced by Section 45 of the Act. Whatever may be the date of receipt or accrual of consideration as a result of transfer of a capital asset, the accrual or receipt of consideration would have to be attributed, by statutory mandate, to the year of transfer. Whatever may be the date of receipt or accrual of consideration as a result of transfer of a capital asset, the accrual or receipt of consideration would have to be attributed, by statutory mandate, to the year of transfer. Hence enquiry into the question as to when the right to receive the compensation amount accrues to a person, in the case of compulsory acquisition of his property under the provisions of M. P. Town improvement Trust Act, though interesting would not be relevant for the purpose of determining the year of charge ability of capital gains because the relevant year is, by virtue of the deeming provisions of Section 45 of the Act, the year when the transfer took place. ( 6. ) RELIANCE was placed on behalf of the assessee on the decision of the supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore v. B. C. Srinivasa setty, 128 I T R 294. The question for consideration in that case was whether goodwill generated in a newly commenced business, can be held to be an asset, within the terms of section 45 of the Act. The Supreme Court held that all transactions encompassed by section 45 of the Act must fall under the governance of its computation provisions and a transfer, to which these provisions could not be applied, must be regarded as never intended by section 45 of the Act to be the subject of the charge. ( 7. ) NOW, computation of capital gains, as provided by section 48 of the act, in the case of compulsory acquisition of land, does not present any difficulty. The cost of acquisition and the full value of consideration received or accrued can be ascertained. This is not a case to which the computation provisions cannot apply at all. It was, however, contended that provisions of sections 54-B and 54-E of the Act, governing the reliefs to be granted to the assessee, would never be attracted, if the amount of compensation in case of compulsory acquisition of land accrued to the assessee after the expiry of the period prescribed by those provisions. It is, however, not necessary for us to decide the question as to whether the assessee is or is not entitled to the reliefs provided by section-54-B and section 54-E of the Act, as that question would be examined by the authorities concerned as and when it arises. It is, however, not necessary for us to decide the question as to whether the assessee is or is not entitled to the reliefs provided by section-54-B and section 54-E of the Act, as that question would be examined by the authorities concerned as and when it arises. Moreover, the question as to whether reliefs should be provided to assessees to relieve the hardship, by making suitable legislative provisions is a matter for the Legislature to consider. But absence of provisions, which would have entitled an assessee to claim relief, cannot have the effect of rendering the provisions regarding computation for quantifying the income chargeable under the head "capital gains" unworkable. In the instant case, those provisions cannot be held to be non-applicable as in the case of goodwill of a new business. The decision in 128 IT R 294 (supra) is, therefore, distinguishable on facts and cannot be pressed into service in support of the contention advanced on behalf of the assessee. ( 8. ) IN our opinion, therefore, the Tribunal was right in holding that the capital gains were chargeable to tax in the year of transfer of capital asset, i. e. the assessment year 1974-75. Our answers to the first three questions referred to this Court by the Tribunal are in the affirmative and against the assessee. As regards question No. 4, that question does not really arise out of the order of the Tribunal as the question, as to whether the assessee is or is not entitled to the reliefs available under the Act, on the analogy of reliefs in the case of enhancement of compensation, has not been decided by the tribunal. We, therefore, decline to answer that question. ( 9. ) IN the circumstances of the case, parties shall bear their own costs of this reference. Reference as regards first three questions answered in the affirmative. Fourth question held did not arise.