Two key issues: 1) Assessment of rental income received by...

Two key issues: 1) Assessment of rental income received by co-owners as income of an Association of Persons (AOP), and 2) Treatment of income from letting out a plinth as income from house property. Regarding the first issue, the court held that the rental income should be assessed as AOP income as the co-owners jointly received rent, maintained a single account, and raised loans collectively. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in ITO vs Ch. Atchaiah, which allowed assessing AOP income even if members were previously assessed individually. On the second issue, the court ruled that a plinth cannot be treated as a building for the purpose of Section 26 of the Act. A plinth is merely the floor level above the ground, and construction on it does not qualify as a building. Therefore, income from letting out a plinth cannot be considered income from house property, and depreciation cannot be allowed on it.