1986 (5) TMI 74

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s into partnership under the name and style of 'Nalinidevi Associates' having its principal place of business at Himayatnagar for the purpose of constructing godowns on the site at Karmanghat, Hyderabad, belonging to the first party, viz., R. Nalinidevi and for leasing out the godowns to the (FCI) on any other party. Clause 3 of the partnership deed again reiterates the purpose of the partnership as construction of godowns and leasing them out to the FCI or any other party and for any other business or businesses as may be agreed upon mutually from time to time. Clause 4 of the partnership deed states that the firm should be deemed to have commenced from 4-4-1977. Clauses 5 and 6 of the partnership deed state that a portion of land bearing Sl. Nos. 55 and 56 at Karmanghat village, Hyderabad East Taluk, belonging to Smt. Nalinidevi valuing Rs. 10,000 shall be treated as an asset of the partnership firm and also the value of the said site of Rs. 10,000 should be treated as capital contribution of Smt. Nalinidevi. Clause 7 states that the capital required for construction of the said godowns shall be invested by parties 2 to 6 in proportion to their profit-sharing ratio mentioned in c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y sound, roden proof/damp proof and shall have pucca damp proof floor and water tight with slanting proofing to allow free flow of rain water so as to prevent damage being done to the stocks due to seepage and leakage of water. The godown walls shall be smoothly plastered and they should be whitewashed once in a year. The plinth level of hired godowns shall be more than one foot above the road level and the surrounding ground level shall not be in a low lying area allowing accumulation of rain/flood waters. The godowns shall be away from canals, streams and flood water, channels, nallas and shall be well ventilated. There should also be proper road and drainage arrangement. If during the period of lease, the flooring in godown is found sinking or the roof/walls of the godown is/are found to be damaged resulting in leakage/seepage of water inside the godown or the shutters/doors of the godown are found to be damaged by rust/moths, etc., it will be the liability of the lessors to reconstruct the flooring of the godown, repair the roof/walls of the godown is well as the shutters/doors thereof as the case may be to make the place structurally sound and storageworthy. In case the requis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Bombay High Court in Maharashtra Fertilizers & Chemicals v. CIT [1983] 37 CTR (Bom.) 9 held that income derived from letting out of godowns was income derived from property as the assessee-firm never actually utilised the godowns for its business purposes. He also held that following certain other decisions house-owning, however, profitable cannot be a business or trade under the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') where income is derived from house property by exercise of property rights. It is the nature of operations and not the capacity of the owner that must determine whether the income is from property or from trade. Therefore, he had computed the income as income from house property granted allowable deductions under section 24 of the Act and computed net income from house property at Rs. 1,10,718. 6. Aggrieved against the said assessment dated 19-5-1984 the assessee went in appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The learned Commissioner (Appeals) by his impugned orders virtually confirmed the ITO's reasoning. The learned Commissioner followed the Bombay High Court decision in Maharashtra Fertilizers & Chemicals' case. In that case the assessee was a registered firm ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oved by the Chief Inspector of Explosives, Government of India, and constructed some units on the said plot of land in conformity with the rules and permitted the vaults to be used by the film distributors on payment of monthly charge. Vault-holder was given a key of the vault but the key of the entrance, which permitted access to the vaults, remained in the exclusive possession of the company. The company also rendered services to the vault-holders such as fire services for which it paid an annual amount to the municipality, railway booking offices in the premises free of charge for the convenience of vault-holders for despatch and receipt of film parcels and a canteen and a telephone. It maintained regular staff for running the aforesaid services and the entire staff of the Indian Motion Pictures Distributors Association was also paid Rs. 800 for the part-time services rendered by them. In fact the vault-holders were held to be licence holders from the assessee-company by the Bombay High Court. The said view of the Bombay High Court was confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in National Storage (P.) Ltd.'s case. None of the additional services agreed to be rendered by the assesse....