9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (3) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal the dispute relates to two items, viz., a sum of ₹ 4,000 which was paid to the assessee by way of salami by one Dwarka Prasad Agarwal for obtaining a lease also another sum of ₹ 351 paid by another person, viz., one Amin Ahmed Khan, for obtaining settlement of fireclay land from the assessee. The assessee is a zamindar and within the point of his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been found that sum was received by the assessee as salami or premium for settlement of fireclay land measuring about 51.6 acres for a period of 9 years. The two leases, one in favour of Dwarka Prasad Agarwala, and the other in favour of Amin Ahmed Khan, are both annexures to the reference made by the Tribunal and the two points which have been formulated for decision by this Court are : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Singh. In the case in question the point was whether a sum of ₹ 5,25,000 received as salami by the assessee was taxable as income. In dealing with this point their Lordships relied upon a Special Bench decision of this Court reported in Province of Bihar v. Pratap Udainath Sahi Deo where it was held that salami could not be regarded as income as a matter of law. It may in certain cases be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the Income Tax authorities show that there were circumstances to indicate that it was so. In the present case no such circumstances has been indicated by the revenue authorities. On the contrary the indentures which are on the record indicate that the salami was not in payment of advance rent. In my opinion, therefore, the two items of salami in the present case could not be assessed as revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
