9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (10) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on was handed over but formal deeds of conveyance executed subsequent to the accounting year relevant to the assessment year under consideration ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was liable to be taxed as owner under section 22 of the Income-tax Act in respect of the properties handed over to various Sahebzadas by firmans without executing proper deeds of conveyance ? " The assessment years concerned here are 1975-76 and 1976-77. It is brought to our notice by learned standing counsel for the Revenue and, in fact, this fact is also found stated in the order of the Tribunal that identical questions were referred earlier for the opinion of this court for the assessment years 1959-60 to 1963-64 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come owners of the properties mentioned in question No. 2 by adverse possession for more than 12 years. In other words, even if it is assumed that their adverse possession commenced in the accounting year 1959-60, the prescribed period would be over prior to the commencement of the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1975-76. So far as the first question urged by learned counsel is concerned, we are not satisfied about the correctness of the proposition. No clear decision has been brought to our notice that a purchaser under an agreement of sale, entitled to invoke the doctrine of part performance, must be held to be holding adversely to the owner and that at the end of 12 years of his possession, he becomes the owner of such p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enue, though this question was answered against the assessee in the decision referred to above. Because of the interregnum and the interval between the assessment years concerned in that case and this case and because of the change in the legal position brought about by operation of law, the second question is liable to be answered in favour of the assessee and it is accordingly answered. We may also mention that learned counsel for the assessee tried to persuade us to take a view different from that expressed by this court on the first question with reference to a recent Bench decision of this court in CIT v. Sahney Steel & Press Works (P.) Ltd. [1987] 168 ITR 811. But, for the reasons stated above, we are not inclined to re-examine the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
