ARCHNA LUTHANSA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter has been placed before the court for appropriate orders, as the assessed, at whose instance the reference has been made, has failed to file the paper books despite various opportunities.

(2.) ALTHOUGH the assessed remains unrepresented, but since the issue raised in the present reference stands concluded by a decision of the Apex Court, we dispense with the filing of the paper books and proceed to dispose of the reference.

(3.) A similar issue came up for consideration of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Poddar Cements (P) Ltd. : [1997]226ITR625(SC) . Their Lordships of the Supreme Court were pleased to hold that though under the common law 'owner' means a person who has got valid title legally conveyed to him after complying with the requirements of law, such as the Transfer of Property Act, the Registration Act etc., in the context of section 22 of the Act, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the Act, namely, to tax the income, 'owner' is a person who is entitled to receive income from property in his own right. It has been held that the requirement of registration of the sale deed in the context of section 22 of the Act is not warranted.