Itta/78/2003 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax Ap 1 Hyd v. Smt.premalatha Sec Bad
High Court
03 Sep 2014 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · taphc
Parties
Itta/78/2003 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax Ap 1 Hyd v. Smt.premalatha Sec Bad
Date of order
03 Sep 2014
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itta/78/2003 Of The Comm. Of Income Tax Ap 1 Hyd v. Smt.premalatha Sec Bad, the High Court (2014) decided the matter.
Issue: The controversy is as to whether the income received bythe respondent herein in the form of rents from the leaseholdpremises can be treated as income from business or income fromhouse property.
Decision: In view of the same, we dismiss the appeal.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYANDHON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHALLA KODANDA RAM
I.T.T.A No.78 of 2003
JUDGMENT:-(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice L.Narasimha Reddy)
This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 is filed against the order, dated 12.06.2000, passed by theHyderabad Bench ‘B’ of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal inI.T.A.No.1421/Hyd/95.
The controversy is as to whether the income received bythe respondent herein in the form of rents from the leaseholdpremises can be treated as income from business or income fromhouse property.
In respect of the very respondent, the same question wasdealt with by us in R.C.No.5 of 1997. The R.C., in turn, arose outof I.T.A.Nos.602 and 606 of 1993. The orders passed in thoseappeals constitute the basis for the Tribunal in dismissingI.T.A.No.1421/Hyd/95. We took the view that in the facts of thecase, the income of the respondent deserves to be treated as theone from business.
In view of the same, we dismiss the appeal. There shall beno order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed in this appeal shall alsostand disposed of.
_______________________
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J
________________________
CHALLA KODANDA RAM, J
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.