9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (11) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Drill Rock Engg. Co. (P.) Ltd. was gross income assessable under the head 'Income from other sources'. Thus, the aggregate came to Rs. 78,000. He held that the assessee in its turn paid rent to Girijabai Modi Family Trust at the rate of Rs. 3,250 per month or Rs. 39,000 in the aggregate. He gave a deduction on this account of Rs. 39,000 from the gross incomings of Rs. 78,000 apparently taking the view that this expenditure was necessary for earning the gross income. Thus, Rs. 39,000 was brought to tax by the ITO. 3. The assessee appealed to the AAC and contended that the income of the assessee from this source was assessable under the head 'Income from house property' and the income to be assessed could be only Rs. 26,000. The AAC did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat where a vendor had agreed to sell property and has received consideration but had not executed registered sale deed, the liability to pay tax on income from property by the vendor had not ceased since he continued to be the 'owner of the property'. The agreement to sell and the receipt of consideration by him does not create any beneficial ownership in the said person since the said concept was unknown to Indian law. The ratio of the aforesaid decision really does not help the stand of the revenue in the present case. Having heard the parties in the background of facts, we have set out we would summarise the correct position as obtaining in this case as under. 5. The trust was the owner of certain lands which were purchased by it on 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t a person who builds a superstructure upon the land of another man remains the owner of the superstructure and can at the end of his term remove that superstructure from the land, whereas in England a person who erects a building on the land of another cannot do so as the building at the end of the lease becomes the property of the lessor. It is contended that as the title to the Cricket Club to remain in occupation of that land ceased in 1925 when a long lease was taken from Government and as it did not on the cessation of that tenure remove the buildings from the land, it must be deemed that the Government became the owners of those buildings and that the assessee consented to that position. I see nothing to warrant any such supposition. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h superstructure though it stood the land which was leased out by the trust. The assessee was the owner of such superstructure and the income therefrom would be assessable in the hands of the assessee as income from property. Regarding the balance, i.e., superstructure put up by the trust at its own cost on the land belonging, to it, the trust was assessable in respect of the income derived under the head 'Income from house property'. The income attributable thereto was fixed at Rs. 4,000 per month by the Tribunal in its order dated 19-10-1983. Such income is assessed under the head 'Income from house property' in the hands of the trust. When the entire income received, i.e., for the property of the trust as well as for the superstructure o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
