1988 (7) TMI 107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... male issue but only a daughter Mrs. Nirmal Sarin married to Shri Harish Chandra Sarin. Shri Prem Nath Khanna left a will dated 23-6-1971 and the life interest in the house property in question bequeathed to his wife Smt. Kaushalya Rani - the assessee, was described in the following manner in paras 5 and 6 of the said will which are relevant for this purpose : "5. I hereby bequeath my property situated at 29, Gold Links, New DeLhi-3 to my only daughter, Mrs. Nirmal Sarin wife of Shri. Harish Chander Sarin, to the exclusion of everybody else, subject, however, to the condition what my wife Smt. Kasuhalaya Rani, shall have life interest in the said property and shall be entitled to live in the fault presently occupied by me or any other fa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....siderations. 5. We have considered the rival submissions on both the sides. Firstly, the WTO was not right in holding that the life interest is not immovable property. Any interest in immovable property is itself an immovable property. The content of the assessee's life interest is clear from paras 5 & 6 of the will which have been quoted above. She was made entitled to live in the flat, to enjoy the entire income derived therefrom during her lifetime and to exercise all the rights of ownership therein in respect of the income or the use thereof except the disposal. Para 6 of the will prohibited the disposal of the property by the daughter except with the consent of the assessee and after making such provision as the assessee may conside....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....260. In case of R. B. Jodha MalKuthiala v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 570 (SC), it was held by the Supreme Court that the owner must be person, who can exercise the rights of the owner, not on behalf of the owner but in his own right as in this case. In the case of Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan v. Municipal Board of Sitapur AIR 1965 SC 1923, the Supreme Court observed that though the expression "belonging to" no doubt was capable of denoting an absolute title, it was nevertheless not confined to connoting that sense and that full ownership could also be signified by that expression. In the present case, the controversy regarding registration, etc., does not concern us as the assessee got the life interest under a will. In the case of K. Ramachandra ....