Cit vs Smt. Kamla Sondhi
2004 Latest Caselaw 176 Del

ORDER

The question mentioned hereinbelow has been referred by the Tribunal. However, the notice on the respondent has yet not been effected. Anyhow, notice is not required in the instant case as the case is covered by the decision of the Apex Court in favor of the assessed. The question that has been referred by the Tribunal is as under :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that rental income from flat in a multistoreyed building is assessable in the hands of the assessed under the head 'Income from house property even though the assessed had not acquired legal title to the ownership of the said property through a registered sale deed in her favor ?"

2. In view of the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. Podar Cement (P) Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 625 (SC), the answer is required to be given in favor of the assessed and against the revenue. The Apex Court in the said decision has held as under :

2. In view of the Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT v. Podar Cement (P) Ltd. (1997) 226 ITR 625 (SC), the answer is required to be given in favor of the assessed and against the revenue. The Apex Court in the said decision has held as under :

"We are conscious of the settled position that under the common law, owner means a person who has got valid title legally conveyed to him after complying with the requirements of law such as the Transfer of Property Act, Registration Act, etc. But, in the context of section 22 of the Income Tax Act, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the Income Tax Act, namely, to tax the income, we are of the view, owner is a person who is entitled to receive income from the property in his own right."

Accordingly, the reference is answered in favor of the assessed.