P. J. EAPEN vs COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (Kerela High Court)
Assessee completed construction of his property in the previous year relating to the asst. yr. 1983-84, and the same was in existence for a period of 10 months in the said previous year. It was let out on a monthly rent of3,000 and in the said previous year, the total rent received was30,000 for a period of two months. On the basis that "annual value" represents rent for one year, it was contended by the assessee that the property should exist for a whole year to be liable to tax. As the property existed for less than a year, assessee claimed the income as non-taxable. The AO did not accept the plea; but the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the CIT'A') allowed claim of the assessee. Revenue preferred second appeal before the Tribunal. By order dt. 7th October, 1993, the Tribunal held that it is "income from property", but since it is not covered by the term "annual value", such income from property cannot be assessed under that head.
However, since all incomes are to be subjected to tax under the scheme of the Act, said income is chargeable under the head "other sources". While directing so, the Tribunal directed the AO to consider the question relating to allowability of expenses by way of municipal taxes or otherwise against the rental income from the property.Though three questions were proposed by the assessee for reference, only one question as referred to above has been referred...
I Want to know if any one raise the same query as the aforesaid assesse did now a days then is there any ammendment by income tax or will it be still chargable under IOS?,
Clearify under which head we are going to charge the same....umder HP or under IOS....please guide...
CAclubindia
