9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 49 (SC), the rental income earned by the assessee was an income from house property. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee-company having objects amongst others was (i)to buy and develop landed properties, and (ii) to promote and develop markets, the Supreme Court held that the income derived by the company from shops and stalls is income received from property and falls under the specific head described in section 9 being income from property under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. While reaching the said conclusion the Supreme Court has relied upon its earlier judgment reported in the case of United Commercial Bank Ltd. v. CIT [1957] 32 ITR 688 wherein the apex court had explained after exhaustive review of authorities that under the scheme of the Income-tax Act the heads of income, profits and gains enumerated in the different clauses are mutually exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty development and sub-letting of shops and stalls and the question arose as to whether income from sub-letting is a business income or otherwise. While holding that the income earned from the property is a business income it noted the reasons for the same. The principal reason was that since the appellant-company was not the owner of the property or any part thereof there was no question of making the assessment under section 9 of the Act. It is held that the liability of tax under section 9 of the Indian Income-tax Act of 1922 would be of the owner of the building or land appurtenant thereto. It is also held that in case the assessee is the owner of the building or land appurtenant thereto he would be liable to be taxed under section 9 ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
