TMI Blog1988 (2) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1. 3. The assessee was deriving income from a property described as 32-Naraina Industrial Estate, Community Centre, Phase-I,New Delhi. The 2nd and 3rd floors of this property were agreed to be sold by her to her son, Shri Harjit Singh for Rs. 1,10,000, vide unregistered deed dt.15th May, 1981and in pursuance thereof Shri Harjit Singh was put in possession of the first floor w.e.f. Jan., 1982. The assessee did not show the income from rent from the first floor in her return of income for the period from Jan., 1982 to March, 1982 filed on17th July, 1982. The ITO detected the aforesaid omission after he had completed the assessment under s. 143(1) as above. The sale deed with regard to the first floor was ultimately registered on5th Sept., 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... March, 1983and that, therefore, the present assessment deserved to be quashed. 5. The learned AAC accepted the submissions of the assessee that the income in question could not have been brought to tax in her hands from January to March, 1982. Accordingly he annulled the reassessment order. 6. The Department assails the above order as erroneous and draws support from the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nawab Sir Mir Osman Alikhan vs. CWT (1986) 57 CTR (SC) 89 : (1986) 162 ITR 888 (SC). 7. We have gone through the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to above and have also gone through the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sushil Ansal vs. CIT (1986) 58 CTR (Del) 27 : (1986) 160 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law, with which we are in respectful agreement, we are of the opinion that the assessee in the present case cannot be assessed with regard to rental income from the first floor of the aforementioned property, because in terms of the agreement to sell, she had received Rs. 95,000 out of Rs. 1,10,000 being the stipulated price of the property, and in terms of the said agreement, she had handed over the possession of the first floor to her son, who was in enjoyment of the rental income from Jan., 1982 onwards in his own right. Besides, as has been pointed out by the learned AAC, the son has also been assessed in respect of the said rental income. It is not possible to tax two persons with regard to the same income. For these reasons, we up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
