The annual value of a property, consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto, of which the assessee is the owner, is chargeable to tax under the head ‘Income from house property’. However, if a house property, or any portion, is occupied by the assessee, for the purpose of any business or profession, thereof carried on by him, the profits of which are chargeable to income-tax, the value of such property is not chargeable to tax under this head.
Thus, three conditions are to be satisfied for property income to be taxable under this head.
1. The property should consist of buildings or lands appurtenant thereto.
2. The assessee should be the owner of the property.
3. The property should not be used by the owner for the purpose of any business or profession carried on by him, the profits of which are chargeable to income-tax.
S. 22 & 56 of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Rent received by letting out of the terrace is to be assessed under the head “income from house property” and not as “income from other sources”—Matru Ashish Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. vs. ITO (2012) 144 TTJ 446 (ITAT-Mum.)
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Business income—The Income assessable under the head “Income from house property” should be taken at 60 per cent of the composite amount received, having regard to the terms and conditions indicated in the agreement between the parties and if for the facilities provided 40 percent of the amount is apportioned. The assessee is carrying on business in the hotel industry and therefore, its income has to be assessed only under the head “Business” and not under the head “Other Sources” with or without furniture and fitting and when the assessee makes a profit out of it—CIT vs. Mysore Intercontinental Hotels P. Ltd.  322 ITR 116 (KARN)
Sec. 22, 28(i) & 56(2) of Income tax Act, 1961—Income from House Property—Whether income received as lease rentals towards the amenities and Furniture and fixture is to be assessed under the head other sources and accordingly, the depreciation is to be allowed from the income so arrived. While reversing the order of CIT (A), ITAT, Hyderabad a Bench held that:—”We have to see the intention of the assessee whether the letting was the doing of a business or to exploitation of his property by an owner. The assessee when exploited the property to derive rental income it has to be held that the income realized by him by way of rental income from a building if the property with other asset attached to the building to be assessed as ‘income from house property’ only. The only exceptions are cases where the letting of the building is inseparable from letting of the machinery, plant and furniture. In such cases, it has to be held that the rental would not have been realized but for the letting out of the machinery, plant or furniture along with such building and therefore, rental received for the building is to be assessed under the head ‘Income from other sources’. In the present case, on the facts of the case, it is clear that the assessee as the owner of the building was only exploiting the property as owner by letting out the same and realizing income by way of rent. Such rental income was liable to be assessed under the head ‘Income from house property.’ The various assets let out to the tenants are incidental to letting out the building being integral part of the letting. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the CIT(A) and restore that of the AO. This ground of the Revenue is allowed.” Deputy Director of Income Tax vs. G. Raghuram  16 ITCD 181 (ITAT-Hyd)
S. 172 of IT Act, 1961, arts 7(1), 22 of DTAA with Switzerland—Non-resident—The applicant, a non-resident shipping company, incorporated under the law of Switzerland, entered into medium and long-term shipping contracts for the transportation of cargo worldwide, and in the course of performance of such contract, the applicant entered into further contracts with port agents, brokers and stevedores. The applicant entered into a shipping contract with a Dubai Charterer for transportation of cargo from India ports to China during the years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The fright was invoiced and received by the applicant of which the Dubai charterer received a percentage as its commission. Therefore, tax on the profits arising in India by the carriage of goods from Indian ports to foreign ports be governed by Income-tax Act, 1961 and the freight income received by it on account of carrying cargo from India ports to foreign ports by developing chartered vessels is liable to be taxed in India—Gearbulk Ag, In re. (2009) 318 ITR 66 (AAR)
S. 22, 145 of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The assessee is engaged in real estate business during the period from 1979 to 1984. Assessee anticipating completion of building and sold before Dec., 31, 1986 prepared an estimate accepting profit and paid first installment of advance tax in time. The annual value of the property of which the assessee was the legal owner, cannot be assessed in the hands of the assessee under s. 22 of the Act—CIT vs. Babukhan Builders (2010) 326 ITR 133 (AP)
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Business—If the primary or the dominant object is to lease or let out property, the income derived from the property would have to be regarded as income from house property. Conversely if the dominant intention of the assessee is to exploit a commercial asset by carrying on a commercial activity, the income would have to be treated as income from business. Merely styling an agreement as a warehousing agreement would not be conclusive of the nature of the transaction—Nutan Warehousing Company P. Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2010) 326 ITR 94 (Bom)
S. 22, 32 of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The income arising from the letting out of guest house with furniture and fixtures, if any, cannot be held as a separate income taxable under the head Income from other sources” but has to be computed under the head Income from house property. There is no provision under that head of income to allow depreciation allowance—Dy.CIT vs. International Business Services Group P. Ltd. (2009) 314 ITR 114 (ITAT-Chohin)
S. 22, r/w s. 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—In the earlier assessment year to the assessment year in question the claim of the assessee under s. 22, r/w s. 28(i) of IT Act was allowed. If there is no change in the set of facts to the earlier assessment year and the Assessing Officer has also not brought any new material on record to take different view in the year under consideration, the claim of the assessee is allowable in year under consideration also—ACIT vs. Harbilas Cold Storage & Food Products (2011) 131 ITD 171 (ITAT-Luck)
S. 22 of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—In order to be treated as owner for purpose of s. 22, the assessee must be in exclusive possession of the property in his own right to the exclusion of all others and there is no requirement that there has to be a registered deed of conveyance for a person of s. 22 of IT Act, 1961—Pallonji M. Mistry vs. CIT
S. 22, 27(iiib), 269UA(f)(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—In sec. 27 and 269UA of the Act, the word “lease of property” is used for the purposes of conferring right upon the persons who qualifies to become a deemed owner of the property under s.22 of the Act. Before the assessee can be so considered as a deemed owner of the property in question, he must have taken the property on lease for a term not less than 12 years, because it excludes lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year. Since the tenancy in question is unregistered and month to month basis, the provisions of s. 27(iiib) of the Act would not apply. Therefore the claim of the assessee for deemed ownership of the building in question under s. 22 r/w s. 27(iiib) and 269UA(f)(i) of the Act so as to qualify for deduction under s. 24 of the Act rightly rejected by the authorities and thus, the income derived by the assessee form house property, sale of air conditioners and other sources is liable to be treated as “income from other sources”—Tushar Pranvin chandra Shah vs. Dy. CIT (2011) 7 ITR (Trib) 776 (ITAT-Ahd)
S. 22 of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The property in question was owned by “A” and on his demise, the rentals were being received by assessee. The assessee is entitled to 1/11th share of the rental income as there are eleven legal representatives, therefore 1/11th of total rental income is assessable in the hands of the assessee under s. 22 of IT Act—Vijay Jain vs. CIT
S. 22, 27(iiib), 269UA(f)(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—In sec. 27 and 269UA of the Act, the word “lease of property” is used for the purposes of conferring right upon the persons who qualifies to become a deemed owner of the property under s.22 of the Act. Before the assessee can be so considered as a deemed owner of the property in question, he must have taken the property on lease for a term not less than 12 years, because it excludes lease from month to month or for a period not exceeding one year. Since the tenancy in question is unregistered and month to month basis, the provisions of s. 27(iiib) of the Act would not apply. Therefore the claim of the assessee for deemed ownership of the building in question under s. 22 r/w s. 27(iiib) and 269UA(f)(i) of the Act so as to qualify for deduction under s. 24 of the Act rightly rejected by the authorities and thus, the income derived by the assessee form house property, sale of air conditioners and other sources is liable to be treated as “income from other sources”—Tushar Pranvinchandra Shah vs. Dy. CIT (2011) 7 ITR (Trib) 776 (ITAT-Ahd)
S. 22, r/w s. 27, of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Income from house property can be assessed once, either in the hands of owner or in the hands of deemed owner. Hence, any income from property can only be assessed to tax under the head Income from house property only in one of the hands of legal or deemed owner—Priyadarshini Properties & Estates (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2012) 134 ITD 290 (ITAT-Mum)
S. 22, r/w s. 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Appropriate head for the income derived by way of letting out the unsold flats should be income from house property and not business income—Azimganj Estate (P) Ltd. vs. CIT
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Income from property—The assessee is engaged in letting out rooms in a lodging house and the building was rented out to a bank on long-term lease. Therefore, income earned from letting out the building to the bank has to be assessed as income from property—Joseph George and Co. vs. ITO (2010) 328 ITR 161 (Ker)
S. 22 of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The owner of the house property and the occupier of the portion of the same must be the same person and the profits of such owner from the business or profession must be chargeable to income-tax in order to be excluded from the operation of s. 22 of the Act. Hence, the exemption under s. 22 in respect of a property not owned by the partnership firm cannot be availed of by an individual co-owner merely because he happens to be a partner of a firm in occupation of a part of the property—Prodip Kumar Bothra vs. CIT (2011) 244 CTR 366 (Cal)
S. 22, 27 & 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Under s. 22, the annual value of the property consisting of any building or land or land appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head income from the house property. In the present matter the assessee got tenancy rights initially for 11 months which was extended upto 20 years. Under the lease agreement assessee developed the property and therefore, assessee got a right to receive the lease rentals from tenants and, accordingly, for the purpose of s. 22 the assessee become owner of the property and the income there from is chargeable under the head Income from house property and not as business income—ACIT vs. Kanwaljeet Singh (HUF) (2011) 135 TTJ 688 (ITAT-Delhi)
Income from house property—Sec. 22, 28(i)— IT ACT, 1961—Income-tax Officer v. RR Industries Ltd.  146 TTJ 620 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
S. 22,28 of Income-tax Act, 1961—Income from property—Whether the income falls under the head of business income or income from property has to be decided from case to case depending on the question whether the transaction involved is business activity or merely deriving rental income. One of the determining factors may be whether the transaction is a normal part of the business of the assessee. If the business of the assessee has nothing to do with the renting of property and renting is an isolated transaction to earn property income, the mere fact that such income will result in reduction of business loss is not enough to hold that it will fall under the head of business income. If this is to be the sole test, every rental income of a businessman has to be held to be business income. Under the scheme of the IT Act, 1961, the heads of income are mutually exclusive. When a particular item of income falls specifically under one head, it cannot be charged under any other head. In this case, the assessee received income from letting out of a building but sought to treat the income as business income. Since the main object of the assessee is to manufacture and market food articles and not renting of property and further it took property on lease and in turn let out for nine years which is not its business activity and, therefore, income earned is assessable as income from property—Sheetal Khurana Foods (P.) vs. ITAT (2011) 335 ITR 1 (P&H)
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Business income or income from house property—The assessee, in the business of edible oil contract packaging, in its profit and loss account showed a certain amount as licence fee from letting out of its factory buildings. The assessee had no intention to permanently discontinue its business. It was using its assets through a third party to tide over financial difficulties, but possession of the business always remained with it. Therefore, the income from letting out the assets is to be treated as business income and thus, deduction is available against such business income—ACIT vs. S & S Industries Enterprises Ltd. (2012) 14 ITR (Trib) 574 (ITAT-Chennai)
S. 22, 28, 143(1)(a), (3), 147 of IT Act, 1961—Reassessment—No worthwhile exercise can be carried on by the Assessing Officer to consider whether the assessment can be reopened, on the basis of the objection of the audit party, which contention has no relevance for the purpose of considering the assessment under s. 147 of the Act, having regard to the order under s. 143(1)(a) of the Act—CIT vs. IDEAL Garden Complex P. Ltd. (2012) 340 ITR 609 (Mad)
S. 22, r/w cl. 7 of Part-I of Second Schedule, of the Chartered Accounts Act, 1949—Professional misconduct—In order to hold the respondent guilty under cl. 7 of part 1 of Second Schedule of the chartered Accountant Act, 1949, it must be established act or omission on the part of the respondent related to his professional duty as a chartered accountant. Therefore, in order to attract the aforesaid clause, the act or omission must be in connection with the duties cast upon a chartered accountant in such capacity which no person other than a chartered accountant can perform—CICAI vs. Dipak Kumar De Sarkar
S. 22 & 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income form house property—The income from all house property shall be treated as income from house property, except those which are in occupation of the assessee itself for the purpose and is being used for business or profession—CIT vs. Saran Holding (P) Ltd. (2011) 241 CTR 527 (Patna)
S. 22, 28(i) & 56 of the IT Act, 1961—Business Income—Since the object of the assessee is to run the business centre by exploiting the property and not mere letting out the property, therefore, the receipts from such activity must be considered as business receipts under the head ‘profits and gains from business or profession”—Harvindrapal Mehta (HUF) vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 122 TTJ 163 (ITAT-Mum)
Income Tax Act, 1961, secs. 22, 147 & 148—Income from House Property—The following question was involved “(1) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case annual value of the property in question had been assessed to tax as income from house property under Section 22 under Part C of Chapter 4 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and subsequent increase in the actual rent with retrospective effect could result in re-assessment of the annual value of the property by recourse to Section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (2) If so, whether recourse to section 147/148 as on the date noticed were issued for the assessment were within the limitation for initiating proceedings under those provisions.” While dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court held that “The amount of arrears of enhanced rent, as received by the assessee, consequent upon retrospective upward revision of rent, would be liable to be included in the income of relevant previous year, in which it was received, and that on that count, the Revenue will not be entitled to initiate proceedings under, or to take recourse to, provisions of Section 147/148 of the Act, as it does not amount to income being under assessed while making assessment, as contemplated by Explanation 2 of Section 147, and that the provisions of Section 25B are clarificatory in nature, and are required to be given retrospective effect.” Cit, Jodhpur vs. Dowager Maharani Residential Accommo & Ors.  7 ITCD 143 (Raj.)
S. 22, r/w s. 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—the assessee company is engaged in the business of construction and development of residential/commercial units. The assessee after taking interest free security deposits given its portion of the building on lease and received lease rent from the said property and there is no material on record to show that the said lease rent received by the assessee is from exploitation of the property by way of complex commercial activities as prime object. Thus, the rental income derived by the assessee as an owner of the property is liable to be assessed under the head income from house property and not profit and gains from business or profession—Roma Builders (P.) Ltd. vs. Jt. CIT (2011) 131 ITD 91 (ITAT-Mum)
S. 22 & 28(i) of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Since the assessee let out the buildings to its sister concern only with an intention to earn rental income not for the purpose of exploiting the commercial asset, therefore, the income earned from the said buildings has to be assessed as income from house property under s. 22 of the Act—Margadarshi Housing (P) Ltd vs. ITO (2009) 123 TTJ 89 (ITAT-Hyd)
S. 22 & 28 of IT Act, 1961—A.Y. 2000-01—Income from House Property or Business Income—If assessee let out property to group companies without any facility of services at fixed monthly charges, the income from letting out of furnished accommodation would be income from house property and not income from Business
Income Tax Act, 1961, sections 22 and 56—Income from other sources—The question of law referred to the Court was:—” Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar, was right in law in holding that the rental income from letting out open plinths to the Food Corporation of India is assessable under the head ‘ Income from other sources’ and not under the head ‘ Income from house property’?” While disposing of the reference, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that:—“It is clear from the statement of case that what was let out was kutcha plinths on open land, which by no stretch of imagination, could be termed as house property. The property in question from which income was derived, was neither building nor land appurtenant thereto within the meaning of section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, thereof provides that it is the income from property consisting of any “building” or “land appurtenant thereto” which is assessed under section 22 of the Act and not the income from renting out of open land or some kutcha plinth only. In the present case, no building having been let out, there is no question of treating the rent received for letting out of land only as income from house property.
S. 22, 28 of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Even if the assessee used the property commercially by entering into more than one lease, the intention of making the lease has to be looked into and since it is clear that the intention of the assessee is to give the property on a long lease, the income of the assessee is taxable as income from house property and not as income from business—ITO vs. Sheetal Khurana Food P. Ltd.
Income Tax Act, 1961, section 22—Income from property or business—Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the income of the assessee should be assessed under the head ‘Income from business’ instead of ‘Income from property’ as assessed by the ITO?” While answering the question in the negative, the Rajasthan High Court held that:—”The position seems to be fairly admitted that the construction of the hotel had neither been completed during the relevant assessment year nor any hotel business had commenced. In the circumstances, the rental income received by the assessee from its property, by no stretch of imagination, can be held to be income from business. Clause (3) of the memorandum of association does not alter that position at all. Clause (3) only provides, inter alia, the objects of the company to carry on business in respect of the land property dwelling house, hotel, motels, etc. The said clause cannot lead to any justifiable inference that the rental income of the assessee is an income from the business. CIT, Jaipur vs. Hotel Ratanada International (P.) Ltd. (Raj.)…..224
S. 22 & 28(i) of the IT Act, 1961—Business income—The basic condition for income derived from house property is to let out the property against rent that the lessee is free to use the property for his best enjoyment and use but the assessee is providing a host of facilities for storage, loading and unloading, safety and security of goods and hiring for providing these facilities, therefore, income derived from providing facility of storage in the warehouse is income from business of the assessee and cannot be treated as income from house property—ACIT vs. Popat Jamal & Sons (2009) 121 TTJ 265 (ITAT-Chennai)
S. 22, 28 of the IT Act, 1961—The income derived from providing facility of storage in the warehouses is income from business of the assessee and cannot be treated as income from house property—ACIT vs. Popat Jamal and Sons (2009) 313 ITR 238 (ITAT-Chennai)
Income-tax Act, 1961, sections 22 and 28—Income from house property—”Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the income from letting out of building is assessable as business income?” While allowing the appeals, the High Court of Madras held that:—”We are of the considered opinion that the impugned order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside for the same reason that the Revenue should satisfy whether the building or land in question is owned by the assessee before invoking s. 22 of the Act for the purpose of assessing the rental income of the assessee as an income from the house property and to find out whether there is any exploitation of the property by the assessee by giving it away for rent before assessing such rental income as an income from house property, as, without such finding, it may not be proper for the Revenue to bring the income derived from letting out of the property as an income from house property.” CIT vs. Sanmar Holdings Ltd. (Mad)…..140
S. 22 & 28(i) of the IT Act, 1961—Business income—The principle of consistency requires that the view taken by the Revenue in an earlier year should not be departed from in the succeeding years unless the factual or legal position undergoes charge as the income from the godown was consistently taxed by the revenue under the head ‘Business income’ in the earlier year and no change in the factual or legal position in his year has been brought to notice by the Department Representative, thus, there is no justification in unsettling the hitherto settled position—ITO vs. Rasiklal & Co. (P) Ltd. (2009) 123 TTJ 279 (ITAT-Mum)
S. 22 of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The issue involved is whether charges received separately for providing lift service to the tenants in the building are to be assessed as business income or income from house property. Matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for making fresh assessment after verifying facts and terms of tenancy agreements which were not considered by non of authorities before holding that lift is an integral part of a house and, therefore, charges received for providing lift service are to be assessed as ‘income from house property’—CIT vs. Mohan’s Enterprises
S. 22 of the IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Rental income earned by the assessee by letting out flats on licence basis for temporary period is income from house property under s. 22 of the Act—Mangla Homes (P) Ltd. vs. ITO
S. 22, 24 of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—The assessee challenged the order of the Tribunal before High Court under s. 260A of the Act saying that CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the assessee and her three sons are the owners of the property and as such are entitled to receive the income from the said property in their individual right and dual ownership of the house property with regard to the land and superstructure has been legally recognized under s. 22 of the Act. The High Court remitted the file to the Assessing Officer with the same direction earlier issued in same set of facts between same parties —Smt. Gangambika vs. ITO (2009) 315 ITR 262 (Karn)
S. 22, 45 of IT Act, 1961—Business income—Assessee is engaged in the business of dealing in shares. In absence of any material to show that the assessee had changed its business, and that it is not dealing with the shares, and that the shares are kept exclusively for the investment purpose, the income derived from the sale of shares has to be treated as business income—Matheson Bosanquet Enterprises Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 316 ITR 375 (Mad)
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Business income or income from house property—The assessee owned a business complex and premises were let out on rent to six concerns belonging to the family of the assessee wherein either the assessee himself or his close relatives is a director/partner. As per agreement executed between six concerns and the assessee, 50 per cent of the receipt as rental and the balance 50 per cent as . Service charges for various services provided were claimed. Services rendered by the assessee to the occupants were the result of the activities carried on continuously in an organized manner with a set purpose and with a view to earn profits. The agreements entered into with occupants only conferred contractual right to occupy the space for business but they were not vested with any right, title or interest of any kind in the services and facilities provided by the assessee. Hence, the charging of services has to be treated as business income—Vikram Golecha vs. Dy. CIT  123 ITD 438 (ITAT-Jaipur)
S. 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Business income or income from property—The assessee who is dealing in the developing and sale and purchase of properties, derived the rental income from letting out its commercial properties and such income is to be assessed as income from property and not income from business—CIT vs. Haryana Urban Development Authority.  322 ITR 61 (P&H)
S. 10(29) 22, 28 of IT Act, 1961—Exemption—The assessee is a warehousing corporation and its income derived from procurement of wheat and paddy as agent of Food Corporation of India is not exempted under s. 10(29) of the Act—Haryana Warehousing Corporation vs. ACIT (2010) 328 ITR 23 (P&H)
S. 22, 28(i), 56 & 263 of the IT Act 1961—Income from other sources—Under s. 22, the income derived from the property can be assessed under the head “Income from house property” only if the assessee is the owner of the property—Anant Raj Industries Ltd. vs. AO
S. 22, r/w s. 24 and 28(i) of IT Act, 1961—Income from house property—Even qua a leased asset/land, so that the assessee only has leasehold rights therein, it has to be considered as the owner of the building constructed thereon by it and, accordingly, income derived by way of rent from such building is assessable as income from property not as business income.—J.B.Estates Vs. ITO. 142 ITD 355 (ITAT-HYD)
S.22, r/w S.27(iiib), 269UA(f) of IT Act, 1961 — Income from house property — Sec.269UA(f) does not operate differently merely because the licence under different agreement is the same. It is always open to a licensor and a licencee to enter into different agreements for different periods. There is nothing in the provisions that warrants the periods under the various agreements being clubbed. — CIT Vs. Pelican Investments (P.) Ltd.
S.22, of IT Act, 1961 — Income from house property — Mere spitting of rent is not decisive and each case has to be examined on its own facts to determine whether the service charges are a part of the rent. Where service agreement is dependent open rent agreement and thus in absence of rent agreement there can be no service agreement and therefore, service charges received have to be included as a part of its rental income. — CIT Vs. J.K. Investors (Bom.) Ltd.
S. 22, 28(va)(a), 32, 36(1), (2) of IT Act, 1961—Business loss—The debt on sale of leased assets, i.e., in the course of business is allowable as business loss.—IGFT Ltd. Vs. ITO.  24 ITR (Trib) 192 (ITAT-MUM)
Section 22, read with section 28(i), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Income from house property – Metal Products of India vs. CIT.
Section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Income from house property – CIT vs. S.M. Arif.
Section 22, read with section 56, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Income from house property – Gowardhan Das & Sons vs. CIT.
Section 2(22) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 – Deemed dividend – CIT vs. Mukundray K. Shah.
Section 22, read with sections 7 and 24A- Professional misconduct –Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India vs. Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
Reference: – As Per Section 22 of the Income Tax Act 1961
Income from house property
The annual value of property consisting of any buildings or lands appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner, other than such portions of such property as he may occupy for the purposes of any business or profession carried on by him the profits of which are chargeable to income-tax, shall be chargeable to income-tax under the head “Income from house property”.