<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1982 (2) TMI 19 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28760</link>
    <description>Income from house property remains assessable in the transferor&#039;s hands where the conveyance is unregistered and legal title has not passed, even if consideration has been paid, possession delivered, tenants attorned, and rent received by the transferee. The Bombay HC followed its earlier Division Bench ruling and held that legal ownership is material for section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; mere delivery of possession does not make the transferee the owner for assessment purposes. The Court also noted that it was bound by the prior Division Bench view and could not adopt contrary decisions of other High Courts. Accordingly, the property income was held assessable in the assessee&#039;s hands.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:08:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=67757" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (2) TMI 19 - BOMBAY High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28760</link>
      <description>Income from house property remains assessable in the transferor&#039;s hands where the conveyance is unregistered and legal title has not passed, even if consideration has been paid, possession delivered, tenants attorned, and rent received by the transferee. The Bombay HC followed its earlier Division Bench ruling and held that legal ownership is material for section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; mere delivery of possession does not make the transferee the owner for assessment purposes. The Court also noted that it was bound by the prior Division Bench view and could not adopt contrary decisions of other High Courts. Accordingly, the property income was held assessable in the assessee&#039;s hands.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28760</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>