Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C.I.T. versus S.M. ARIB

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C.I.T. v. S.M. Arib - INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 80 of 1994 [2005] RD-AH 887 (29 March 2005)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No.37

I.T.R. 80 of 1994

   

Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

Vs.

M/s Sri S.M.Arif, Nawal Kishore Road, Lucknow

                   

Hon'ble R.K.Agarwal, J.

Hon'ble Prakash Krishna, J.

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following question of law under section 256 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( here in after referred to as the Act) for opinion to this Court:-

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the property situated at Nawal Kishore Road, Lucknow, stood transferred to the wife of the assessee, Farzana Arif, in satisfaction of her claim for '' Mahar' and that the income of the said property should, therefore, be assessed in her hands and not in the hands of the assessee.?"

The matter relates to the assessment year 1982- 83.

The facts in brief are as follows:

The assessee respondent owned a property situate at Nawal Kishore Road, Lucknow, which was given by him to his wife, Smt. Farzana Arif in satisfaction of her claim for '' Mahar". She has been, since then filing the return of income from the said property and is also being assessed as such. The Income Tax Officer in the case of assessee respondent did not accept the claim of the assessee that the property no long belonged to him because such property has not been transferred in the name of the wife by a registered deed. He, therefore, assessed the income from the property in hand of the assessee respondent. However, the Tribunal has set aside the order of the Income Tax Officer and has held that in the earlier orders, in the assessee's own case, the transfer of property by the respondent assessee to his wife in lieu of ''Mehar' has been accepted.

Heard Sri R.K.Upadhya, the learned standing counsel for the department and Shri Shakeel Ahmad for the assessee.

It has been agreed by the counsel for the parties that similar question came up for consideration in I.T.R.57 of 1987 Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Vs. Sheikh Mohd. Arif for the assessment year 1979- 80 and 1980-81, decided on 25-11-2004 before this Court and it has been held that in view of the fact that the wife after transfer started dealing with the property as owner thereof and she has let out the property to the tenant and realized rent from them and her name has also been mutated in the municipal record. Therefore the Tribunal rightly came to the conclusion that the assessee respondent ceased to be the owner of the property in question after transfer and his wife became the "owner" within meaning of Section- 22 of the Act.

   Respectfully following the aforesaid judgment we answer the above question in affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the department. There shall be however, no order as to costs.

Dated: 29th March.2005.

IA


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.