Itr/176/1998 Of B.indira Devi v. The Commisioner Of Incometax
High Court
23 Jun 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Itr/176/1998 Of B.indira Devi v. The Commisioner Of Incometax
Date of order
23 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itr/176/1998 Of B.indira Devi v. The Commisioner Of Incometax, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Issue: The question referred is whether the income received by theassessee in the form of rental income from a building is assessableas business income or as income from house property.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930
ITR.No. 176 of 1998()
---------------------
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN RA 86/COCH/98 IN
ITA.735/1992 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPLICANT:
-----------
SMT. B.INDIRADEVI, TRIVANDRUM.
RESPONDENTS:
-------------
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRIVANDRUM.
BY SHRI.P.K.R.MENON (SR.)
ADV. SRI.GEORGE K. GEORGE, SC FOR IT
THIS TAX REFERENCE HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 23/06/2008, ALONG WITH ITR NO. 177 OF 1998 THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ.
-------------------------
I.T.R. Nos.176 & 177 of 1998
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 23[rd] day of June, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandran Nair, J.
The question referred is whether the income received by theassessee in the form of rental income from a building is assessableas business income or as income from house property. We noticefrom the Trubunal's order that the Tribunal has taken a viewconsistently against the assessee by holding that income in the formof rent from a building should be assessed as income from houseproperty. Even though, copy of the order is not available, learnedstanding counsel submitted that for earlier years Tribunal's orderwas confirmed by this Court. We, therefore, answer the questionreferred against the assessee.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.