TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (6) TMI 63
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Excess tax imposed by the municipal corporation was payable by the assessee while the original tax was payable by the landlord of the assessee. The assessee had paid Rs. 33,742 as excess municipal tax in the accounting years relevant to the assessment years 1974-75 to 1980-81 and deduction was allowed to the assessee from the income derived from subletting in respect of the said amount. However, in the accounting year with which we are concerned in this appeal, the assessee recovered the said amount of Rs. 33,742 from Dena Bank. This amount was added in the income of the assessee by the IAC, after overruling the plea of the assessee to the effect that the said amount was not taxable in the total income because there was no provision in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Smt. T.P. Sidhwa [1982] 133 ITR 840 and as such the excess municipal taxes recovered from the sub-lessee---Dena Bank---was not assessable to tax. We are unable to accept the submission. We are of the opinion that the decision in the case of Smt. T.P. Sidhwa was not applicable to the facts of the present case. In that case, the assessee had entered into a contract to purchase one-fourth share in a house property in 1959, but regular conveyance in his favour was executed in 1963. During the intervening period he received one-fourth share of income from the said property and the High Court held that the rental income received in the intervening period could not form part of the assessable income under the ....