9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether the entire amount of rent receipts is taxable in the year of collection. 2. Whether the disputed amount accrued to the assessee as income during the relevant year. Analysis: 1. The judgment pertains to an application under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, where the Commissioner of Income-tax sought a reference from the Appellate Tribunal regarding the taxability of rent receipts. The assessee, running a cold storage, collected an excess amount per quintal due to a dispute over charges fixed by the State Government. The Tribunal deleted the tax on the amount collected, leading to the Revenue's application for reference. 2. The assessee contended that the disputed amount did not accrue as income, as it was collected under a High Court order pending final decision. The Tribunal extensively analyzed the issue, citing precedents like CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas and Co., emphasizing that only actual income is taxable. The Tribunal found that the disputed amount did not accrue to the assessee during the relevant year, as it was collected under court directions and not as enforceable income. 3. Referring to CIT v. Hindustan Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd., the Tribunal highlighted that disputed amounts not accessible to the assessee do not constitute taxable income. The judgment emphasized that the real accrual of income determines tax liability, not hypothetical accrual. The Tribunal's decision aligned with Supreme Court precedents, indicating that the disputed amount, collected under court orders, did not qualify as taxable income for the assessee. 4. The judgment concluded that no statable question of law arose for reference to the High Court. Citing CGT v. Smt. Kusumben D. Mahadevia, it noted that self-evident legal positions or settled precedents do not warrant a reference. The Supreme Court's stance on declining references in clear-cut cases was reiterated, emphasizing that not all legal questions from Tribunal orders require High Court intervention.
|
