Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.52 seconds)Section 105 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Section 65 in The Transfer Of Property Act, 1882 [Entire Act]
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Assam Etc vs The Panbari Tea Co. Ltd on 19 April, 1965
10.1 A lease is a transaction, which has to be
supported by consideration. The
consideration may be either premium or rent
or both. The consideration which is paid
periodically is called rent. As regards
premium, the Apex Court in the case of
Commissioner of Income Tax, Assam and
Manipur v. Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. reported in
(1965) 3 SCR 811 has made a distinction
between premium and rent observing that
when the interest of the lessor is parted with
for a price, the price paid is premium or
salami, but the periodical payments for
continuous enjoyment are in the nature of
rent, the former is a Capital Income and the
latter is the revenue receipt. Thus, the
premium is the price paid for obtaining the
lease of an immovable property. While rent,
on the other hand, is the payment made for
use and occupation of the immovable
property leased. Since taxing event under
Section 65(105)(zzzz) read with Section
65(90)(a) is renting of immovable property,
Service Tax would be leviable only on the
element of rent i.e. the payments made for
continuous enjoyment under lease which are
in the nature of the rent irrespective of
whether this rent is collected periodically or in
advance in lump sum. Service Tax under
section 65(105)(zzzz) read with Section
65(90a) cannot be charged on the "premium"
Greater Noida Industrial Development ... vs Commissioner Of Customs, Central ... on 1 February, 2021
In the instant case, we observe that the
Appellant has not received any 'rent' from the
assignees and the rent is payable by the
assignees to the state of West Bengal through
DLLRO. Accordingly, we hold that the
premium or salami paid to the Appellant for
transfer of interest in the property, is not
exigible to the service tax as held by the
Tribunal in the case of Greater Noida
Industrial Development Authority v.
Commissioner of Central Excise and Service
Tax, Noida.
A.R. Krishnamurthy And A.R. ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Madras on 2 December, 1980
In the cited judgement of the Madras
Hon'ble High Court in the case of A.R.
Krishnamurthy and A.R. Rajagopalan v.
Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras, (1982)
133 ITR 922 (Mad.), the activity of lease,
consideration thereof have been discussed in detail.
The relevant portion of the decision is reproduced
below : -
D L F Promenade Ltd vs Commissioner, Service Tax-Delhi on 29 January, 2020
12.3. It would be useful to go through the case law of
D L F Promenade Ltd. vs Commissioner, Service
Tax-Delhi vide Final Order No. 50293 of 2023
dated 29 January, 2020 [ Service Tax Appeal No.
54213 of 2014], wherein it has been held as under:-
1