1954 (12) TMI 36 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Taxability of income received by the wife of the assessee from a mokarri lease under section 16(3)(a)(iii) of the Income-tax Act.

Detailed Analysis:
The case involved the assessee, holder of an impartible estate, who created a permanent mokarri lease in favor of his wife for a property called Jharia Hat. The income received by the wife from the property was contested as taxable under section 16(3)(a)(iii) of the Income-tax Act. The Income-tax Officer, Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and Appellate Tribunal all held that the income should be taxed in the hands of the assessee due to lack of adequate consideration in the transfer of assets to the wife.

The key question referred to the High Court was whether the income from the mokarri lease could be added to the assessee's income under section 16(3)(a)(iii) of the Act. The argument put forward by the assessee's counsel was that the mokarri lease did not constitute a transfer of assets within the meaning of the Act. However, the court disagreed, emphasizing that the lease created a permanent leasehold interest in favor of the wife, thus constituting a transfer of assets under section 16(3)(a)(iii).

The court rejected the argument that a lease of immovable property does not amount to a transfer of assets, citing the Transfer of Property Act and established principles. Referring to a previous case, the court affirmed that a mokarri lease is indeed a transfer of assets, supporting the Tribunal's view that the income should be taxed in the hands of the assessee. The court also noted that the counsel conceded that the lease lacked adequate consideration, further solidifying the taxability of the income in question.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the Income-tax Department, affirming that the income from the mokarri lease should be taxable in the hands of the assessee under section 16(3)(a)(iii) of the Income-tax Act. The court directed the assessee to pay the costs of the reference, including a hearing fee.

The judgment was delivered by Ramaswami J., with Misra J. concurring. The reference was answered accordingly, upholding the taxability of the income from the mokarri lease in the hands of the assessee.