Disputed rent and accrual income treatment during eviction litigation turns on whether tenancy rights remain sub judice.

Where an assessee had terminated tenancy and filed eviction suits, disputed rent deposited by occupants did not accrue as income during the pendency of those proceedings because the landlord-tenant relationship itself remained sub judice. Applying the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, especially sections 23 and 24, the Tribunal treated the mere deposit of rent in court, or its potential withdrawal, as insufficient to create a vested right to receive that amount for income-tax purposes. Any amount becoming payable only after the court's decision would take the character of damages or mesne profits and be assessable when the decree was passed, not year-wise during the litigation.

---

---

Issues: Whether rent deposited by occupants against whom eviction suits had been filed could be assessed in the assessee's hands on the basis of accrual during the pendency of those suits.

Analysis: The assessee had served notices to quit and instituted eviction proceedings, thereby disputing the subsisting landlord-tenant relationship. The Tribunal considered the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956, particularly sections 23 and 24, and held that the mere deposit of rent in court or the possibility of withdrawal did not by itself establish a continuing tenancy for income-tax purposes. Where the very status of the occupants as tenants or statutory tenants remained sub judice, the right to receive the amount was not vested in the assessee during the relevant years. Any amount ultimately payable after the court's decision would partake of the character of damages or mesne profits, assessable when the decree was passed.

Conclusion: The disputed rent did not accrue to the assessee during the pendency of the eviction suits and was not assessable year-wise in the relevant assessment years.

---