1976 (4) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me. The appellant's dividend income was Rs. 18,425. The appellant's wife derived dividend income of Rs. 9,666. It is not disputed that the wife's dividend income has to be clubbed with her husband's income under s. 64(iii). Before the ITO it was contended that before clubbing, 80-L relief is to be given to the dividend income derived by the wife. The ITO negatived the contention by holding that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... live apart. The Madras High Court has held that the income from the house property could be included in the assessee's total income and the measure of income to be so included would be subject to the first proviso to s. 9(2) of the IT Act, 1922. That proviso prescribes that where property is in the occupation of the owner for purpose of his own residence, the annual value thereof shall first be d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act, 1922 noticed in the Mahavir Tyagi Committee's report has been plugged by introduction of s. 27(1) of the IT Act, 1961. Sec 27(1) creates a fiction that the spouse transferring house property without adequate consideration is deemed to be the owner of the property and the income from such property should be computed treating the transferor as the owner of the property. The result of this fict....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be the owner of the shares. The wife is, therefore, the owner of the shares transferred. Therefore, we have to determine the dividend income of the wife under the provisions of the IT Act by taking her as the owner of the shares. Sec. 80-L provides a mode of computation for determining the dividend income from shares by allowing a deduction upto Rs. 3,000. So, what the law determines as the divide....