| Case ID |
141606c9-25c6-4ad9-b6e5-508674894b64 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
IT REFERENCE No. 84 OF 1977 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 21, 1986 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court ruled that the mere execution of an agreement to sell and handing over possession of the flats without proper registration of ownership does not confer ownership rights to the assessee. Therefore, the income derived from these flats is classified as 'Income from other sources' rather than 'Income from house property'. The court emphasized that until a regular sale deed is executed, the title remains with the original lessee. The judgment highlights the necessity of formal registration for ownership claims and the implications of tax assessments based on property ownership. |
| Summary |
In the case of Sushil Ansal v. Commissioner of Income Tax, the Delhi High Court addressed the issue of property ownership in relation to income tax assessment. The central question was whether the assessee, Sushil Ansal, could be considered the owner of three flats based solely on an agreement to sell and possession, without formal registration. The court concluded that ownership requires proper registration, and thus, the income from the flats must be assessed under 'Income from other sources'. This ruling underscores the importance of legal ownership documentation in tax assessments and clarifies the distinction between ownership and possession. The case references several precedents, establishing a consistent judicial interpretation of ownership under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. The decision serves as a key reference for future cases concerning property income and ownership rights, emphasizing the need for clarity in property transactions and their tax implications. |
| Court |
Delhi High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
D.K. Kapur, C.J.,
S Ranganathan, J.
|
| Lawyers |
G.C. Sharma,
S.P. Gupta,
P.L. Juneja,
R.K. Raghavan,
Wazir Singh,
R.C. Pandey
|
| Petitioners |
Sushil Ansal
|
| Respondents |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Citations |
1986 SLD 2515,
(1986) 160 ITR 308
|
| Other Citations |
S. Kartar Singh v. CIT [1969] 73 ITR 438 (Delhi),
CIT v. D.L.F. Housing Construction (P.) Ltd. [1981] 128 ITR 773 (Delhi),
D.C. Anand & Sons v. CIT [1981] 131 ITR 77 (Delhi),
CIT v. Meatles Ltd. [1972] 84 ITR 37 (Delhi),
CIT v. Modern Flats (P.) Ltd. [1967] 65 ITR 67 (Bom.),
CIT v. Ganga Properties Ltd. [1970] 77 ITR 637 (Cal.),
CIT v. Union Land & Building Society (P.) Ltd. [1972] 83 ITR 794 (Bom.),
CIT v. Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan 1974 Tax LR 90 (AP),
CIT v. Zorostrian Building Society Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 499 (Bom.),
CIT v. Hindustan Cold Storage & Refrigeration (P.) Ltd. [1976] 103 ITR 455 (Delhi),
CIT v. Hans Raj Gupta [1982] 137 ITR 195 (Delhi),
Addl. CIT v. U.P. State Agro Industrial Corpn. Ltd. [1981] 127 ITR 97 (All.),
Smt. Kala Rani v. CIT [1981] 130 ITR 321 (Punj. & Har.),
CIT v. Steelcrete (P.) Ltd. [1983] 142 ITR 45 (Cal.),
Addl. CIT v. Sahay Properties & Investment Co. (P.) Ltd. [1983] 144 ITR 357 (Pat.),
R.B. Jodha Mal Kuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC),
CIT v. Smt. T.P. Sidhwa [1982] 133 ITR 840 (Bom.),
Nalinikant Ambalal Mody v. S.A.L. Narayan Row, CIT [1966] 61 ITR 428 (SC)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961,
Transfer of Property Act, 1882
|
| Sections |
56,
24,
22,
53A
|