1992 (1) TMI 62

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce of the Revenue. The assessment years with which we are concerned are the assessment years 1977-78 and 1978-79. The question that is referred to us reads thus : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who held that the assessee is not liable to be assessed to tax in r .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s after the execution of the agreement for sale so that the lease rent of Rs. 6,000 per annum should not be included in its business income. The Revenue, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee continued to be the owner of the said sites until they stood transferred to the vendee in accordance with law so that the lease rent that accrued to the assessee in respect of the said sites was liab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ribunal noted that the case of income assessable under the head "Property" under section 22 was different from income assessable as business income under section 28. On behalf of the Revenue, emphasis has been laid upon the judgment of this court in the case of the assessee itself (Ramkumar Mills P. Ltd. v. CIT [1989] 180 ITR 464). As the question before the court in that case shows, the court w .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X