9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1187X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely because it be a signatory to an instrument of conveyance. In our considered opinion, the question of taxability would necessarily have to be answered bearing in mind the individual who had in fact obtained benefits from the property.
In the absence of any finding in tune with the above having been rendered insofar as the appellant is concerned, we find ourselves unable to sustain the order of the Tribunal. Decided in favour of the assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssue for consideration before us is the assessment of income from house property, J-278, Saket, Delhi in the hands of the assessee. 12. Co-ownership of property comes into existence, inter alia, by virtue of a joint purchase of the property. Property J-278, Saket, New Delhi was purchased vide sale deed executed on 8.2.2011 by the husband Mr. Ashish Madan and the assessee jointly on payment of Rs. 3,50,00,000/- in the following manner to the transferor, M/s. Dayal Project Pvt. Ltd.: Pay order/Bank Draft No. / Cheque No. Date Amount Rs. Drawn on In Favor of 203301 1/2/2011 5,00,000/- IDBT Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 203306 5/2/2011 5,00,000/- IDBI Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 203307 9/2/2011 20,00,000/- IDBI Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 213915 9/2/2011 20,00,000/- IDBI Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 474480 7/3/2011 16,50,000/- Axis Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 1451395 7/3/2011 3,50,000/- Citibank N.A. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. 686337 8/3/2011 2,80,000/- Axis Bank Ltd. M/s Dayal Projects Pvt. Ltd. The copy of sale deed appears at pages 20-31 of the Paper Book. 13. On perusal of the sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot a housewife. Computation of income for AY 2015-16 appearing at page 2 of Paper Book shows that she is salary earner and earned salary of Rs. 24 lacs from Adam Smith Associates Pvt. Ltd. in AY 2015-16. Therefore, on facts the case of the assessee before us differs from the Ajit Kumar Rao's case (supra)." 6. Learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal has submitted that the provisions enshrined in Sections 22 to 27 of the Act constitute a self-contained and comprehensive code for the purposes of examining the question of income arising from house property. According to her, the income is to be taxed in the hands of the owner and is thus an aspect which is clearly distinct and different from the position of parties in the instrument. 7. Our attention in this respect was drawn to the following significant observations which came to be entered by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay v. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd. and Others (1997) 5 SCC 482:- "23. From the narration of the facts and the rival submissions it will be seen that the controversy revolves around the meaning to be given to the words "of which the assessee is the owner" occurring in Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stan has a residual right in the property that he left in Pakistan. But the real question is, can that right be considered as ownership within the meaning of Section 9 of the Act. As mentioned earlier that section seeks to bring to tax income of the property in the hands of the owner. Hence, the focus of that section is on the receipt of the income The meaning that we give to the word 'owner' in Section 9 must not be such as to make that provision capable of being made an instrument of oppression. It must be in consonance with the principles underlying the Act." 26. In our opinion, the above observation of this Court clearly fixes the liability on a person who receives - or is entitled to receive the income from the property in his own right. In spite of this, the assessing officers of various circles instead of uniformly following the ratio laid down in this case have taken different diametrically opposite views depending upon the pronouncements of the High Courts concerned in the circles on the scope of Section 22 of the Act. The High Courts of Allahabad, Punjab and Haryana, Rajasthan, Calcutta and Patna have taken the view by correctly understanding the ratio laid down ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds of an assessee in cases where the respective shares are defined or are ascertainable. Section 27 also and while defining as to what meaning is to be ascribed to the expression "owner of house property" makes the following provisions:- "Property owned by co-owners. 26. Where property consisting of building or buildings and lands appurtenant thereto is owned by two or more persons and their respective shares are definite and ascertainable, such persons shall not in respect of such property be assessed as an association of persons but the share of each such person in the income from the property as computed in accordance with sections 22 to 25 shall be included in his total income. [Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, in applying the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 23 for computing the share of each such person as is referred to in this section, such share shall be computed, as if each such person is individually entitled to the relief provided in that sub-section.] "Owner of house property", "annual charge", etc., defined. 27. For the purposes of sections 22 to 26-- (i) an individual who transfers otherwise than for adequate consideration any house ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
