{"id":187553,"date":"2009-08-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009"},"modified":"2016-06-22T01:29:39","modified_gmt":"2016-06-21T19:59:39","slug":"the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar Kumar<\/div>\n
  Advocates}\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT ore' KARNATAKA,  \n\nDATED THIS THE 121%! DAY 01? AUG? 2909 T j  u  \n\nPREsEz~:[*1*\"'   % \"\n\nTHE HOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE \n\n.559 .\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. Jus_f1*-:.<_:E ARA_vm;:}v-K{i.\u00a7\u00a7AR \nI.T.A.NO.2*g;.'\u00a7};_\u00a7);_F;'_g004 '= _ \n\n1.<\/pre>\n
 The Commiszsioxler ;bfIr1c\u00a7>:3;1e-1:-ax, ‘  ”
\nCentral ci:i:1q,c_ RLB:3i1dit1g,.._
\nQueens;I~?:0;\u00e9:d,1-~…—‘:–_V     ‘
\nBangalorg. -I_  ” ‘<\/p>\n
2. The ‘Assistant ‘C9i?::zniis$ioI’1er
\nOf In(:nme\u00bbTa.x,”  V.\n<\/p>\n
Gem-a1′ \u00a331016?-I.(4),_
\nC.R=.Bui1d’ing, ‘Queens Road,<\/p>\n
13\ufb01\ufb01\u20ac53″m- ‘  <\/p>\n
Appeliants<\/p>\n
A1’~i111.;\n<\/p>\n
” ~   ‘ ~ . __ “Sr1.H.S.R’amachandra Rae,
\n‘ V.*3N’;:>;T178, ‘Kavcri’, 5″‘ Main,
\n “3***%P1.iasa, J-P-Ragar,<\/p>\n
–  B:’mga1om~78.\n<\/p>\n
: Respendent<\/p>\n
‘ 3 (By Sr1.S.Parthasarathi,Adv0cate)<\/p>\n
\ufb01ie\u00e9 return for the block mriod 1-4-1990 to 14-7-\u00abZ000 on<\/p>\n
24-4-2001 declaring undisclosed income as 1″1_1’4L.L<\/p>\n
the ceurse of Search proceedings the  <\/p>\n
admitted that he had received  <\/p>\n
Cha1rm’ an of Paramahamsa   <\/p>\n
a sum of 123.42 Iakhs for  <\/p>\n
and secretary ship  Jaya;1a,_\u00a7a1:_ Educetione Sriciety. On
\nveri\ufb01cation by the autuariees  W found that the<\/p>\n
Jayanagar Education had been started<\/p>\n
   Prim’ my and High School
\nat No.2″?’,{ II  east Jayanagar, Bangalore<\/p>\n
and f:.;}1e_ aseessee \u00b0wa’;s the founder life member and was<\/p>\n
.   of  said society during 1996-97. The<\/p>\n
  worked as the Head Master in the<\/p>\n
metitutieta-ti\ufb02 the date of his superarmuation in 1991.<\/p>\n
”   It was also noticed by the a1.1t11oI\u00b0ities that durm g<\/p>\n
   1\u00a7?96~97 the management of the society was taken over by<\/p>\n
  Dr.K.R.PaI*amahamsa. Chariman of Peramahamsa<\/p>\n
V\/’:1;\n<\/p>\n
Foundation (R) Trust, Bangalore. The above said
\nJayanagar Education Society is having Kannadafiviedium<\/p>\n
school and this institution was and is ‘the<\/p>\n
land provided by the Bangalore Deve1opm6\ufb02i;d.:A\u00a511:5\u00a7>itityi.V’  ..  <\/p>\n
4. During the course of A’ <\/p>\n
assessee had admitted thatViiie”‘h.e.d feceivegi   Rs.4’2′<\/p>\n
lakhs from the above esara\ufb01naietanjsa and in<\/p>\n
response to the notice it   ii'{V\u00a7;t1:1\u00a7\u00a7Lv–..g4J41t11o1ih’es under<\/p>\n
Section’ my med block return declaring
\nthere \u00a7;in<ier igjceme at nil and in the said<\/p>\n
block ret1:imhin.Vthei'~statement enclosed to part III of the<\/p>\n
   "total income and loss for the<\/p>\n
 Liasseesmeiatfear 1997-98", the assesses he_.d mentiened<\/p>\n
  trmted Rs.35,0{),000\/- received \ufb01em<\/p>\n
 for relinquishing two pests held by<\/p>\n
":j"i:1 Jayanagar Education Society as a capital receipt.<\/p>\n
''   The Assessing O\ufb01icer after calling upon the assessee to<\/p>\n
 . '4 jzistify the said claim and after considering the reply<\/p>\n
WV;\n<\/p>\n
thereunder held that the amount of Rs.:_3c?-\u00ab “as<\/p>\n
exigbie to tax under the Act by <\/p>\n
income under the head ” income free: ..ot_he1* ~soLii”.ces”f and  <\/p>\n
raised the demand according
\nas undisclosed income.  h ‘ V. V A it   S V\n<\/p>\n
5. Aggieved by   an appeal
\nbefore the err  j25;a\u00a7\/ee\u00ab\u00a71{4)\/crr(A)~v1\/o2-
\nO3 contendin1g’ii:i\u00e9itV  Rs…\u00a77i,54,266\/~ received<\/p>\n
by the   life membership and<\/p>\n
 ” ithef\ufb01ii\u00e9iyiaiiagar Education society by<\/p>\n
enclosing’ thev. cop:\/.of’\u00ab.;t\u00a7I1e proceedings of the executing<\/p>\n
  M&”Lin_g._.held on 15~9~1996 and 2-1(}\u00ab1996<\/p>\n
 ‘coiivehi:ig ‘_ch:”ange in management and his zesiglation to<\/p>\n
the  two posts and thus claimed the said<\/p>\n
‘V._”a.m.ei1i1tt}_i’eceived from Dr.K.R.Paramahamsa is to be<\/p>\n
A “:if’*\u00e9;iAf<\ufb01ted as capital receipt and thus net exigble to tax. The<\/p>\n
i'   Appellate Authority after considering the contentions<\/p>\n
'4 raised by the appellant] assessee rejected the same and<\/p>\n
j <\/p>\n
held that it is to be treated as RevenueAV.\u00e9..1eeei\u00a75\u00a7<\/p>\n
con\ufb01rmed the finding of the Assessing ' <\/p>\n
treated the same as "undiscloseai     AV <\/p>\n
period by order dated 13~9~2o02.i's..% <\/p>\n
6. Aggieved byfhe “_asse”sse_e \ufb01led further
\nappeal before the  the same and by
\nraising the      <\/p>\n
(i) 3?f’,5f?~,266\/~ is to be ‘seated<\/p>\n
 I’\u20ac\u20ac;eipt.  _i1ot revenue receipt.<\/p>\n
 *  first Appellate Authority in<\/p>\n
A  statifag can be termed as goodwill is<\/p>\n
  law anti there was no admitted
\nsale \u00e9fiany goodwill.\n<\/p>\n
   considering the contentions raised by<\/p>\n
ttie-44._assiesseeiiar1d the case law relied thereunder came to<\/p>\n
 eorszlusion that the amount of 123.37 ,54,266\/ ~ is<\/p>\n
   in nature and accordingly allowed the appeal and<\/p>\n
  -\u00bbv-reversed the findings of the first Appellate Authority who<\/p>\n
V has eon\ufb01rmed the \ufb01nding of the Assessing O\ufb02icer.<\/p>\n
{EV<\/p>\n
7. Aggieved by the same, the revenue has \ufb01led the
\npresent appeal by raising the following
\nquestions of law: it  it i<\/p>\n
” Whether the Tribunal is      i
\nhoiding that the  *i!;2_y_’5? in
\nthe assessee for “is
\nmember ship   shipv:’of_theVV
\nJayanagar  ‘ society  he<\/p>\n
had founded.   ‘runr’ii’r1g””for<\/p>\n
the past 31’   but a<\/p>\n
compe1f1satie1’1-   ehol\ufb02d be<\/p>\n
_   i_:1W;t1ature and cannot
\n‘be   under the Head<\/p>\n
2 L 1t1co1::1e__\ufb01’Q1i1\u00ab.other sources?”<\/p>\n
  have  Sri.M.V.Seshachala, learned Senior<\/p>\n
  2  for the Department and<\/p>\n
 learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
 E158 ,ssee : and we have perused the orders of the<\/p>\n
   Appellate Authorities, the Assessment Order as<\/p>\n
T  ” “also the statement gven by the assessee under Section<\/p>\n
132(4)}:-efore the authorities on 14-7-2000, 24~7-\u00a32000,<\/p>\n
5’;\/’\\\u00a7i””‘<\/p>\n
I0<\/p>\n
resulted in a sum of Rs.2,57,0()0\/- being <\/p>\n
had been added by the Assessing <\/p>\n
investment. The assessee  “h  <\/p>\n
the Tribunal and   A’
\nRs.37,54,266\/– is referable””‘to.”the  of the
\npost of honorary 1. appeliant
\nhad worked as full    a substantial
\nperiod 1111 his  e9e1.  The inmnsic link
\nbetween   of the appellant
\n that the said receipt is
\ndirectlyzi ‘refereble A  ‘ pfofession\/avoca\ufb01on and relied<\/p>\n
upon. the judg1ne11t  Menon Vs. CIT (35 ITR 48)<\/p>\n
4.    held that teaching. is an evocation<\/p>\n
 i~.f:VnetV and teaching ‘Vedanta’ is just as much<\/p>\n
  _  ‘as; other teaching and therefore an avocation<\/p>\n
  on Leis premise granted the relief to the asseseee.<\/p>\n
10. Sri.\u00a7;i.V.Seshacha1a contends that the<\/p>\n
 “fauthorities\/citatiorzs referred to and relied upon by the<\/p>\n
Fgav<\/p>\n
‘i<\/p>\n
II<\/p>\n
Tribunal are net applicable and relevant for the purpose of
\nthe piesent set of facts. He further contends the receipt is<\/p>\n
not in the nature of capital receipt as adn;iitte:di3}f”L:<L?;:io;1ey<\/p>\n
was not received for transfer of any capifalv  <\/p>\n
assessee himself claims that said   j <\/p>\n
relinquishing the Life   .91'
\nthe Society and hence it 1:0
\nreceipt. It is also coritegeded.thei;'–tiie._sssesseeiiimself had<\/p>\n
volunteered that it is   his statement<\/p>\n
gven    ieiiithe statement dated 14-7-
\n2000   hot speci\ufb01ed or has come out<\/p>\n
with;Vh'ieiAac1:{1aI"amo\ufb01\u00a31t fie received. In fact he admits in<\/p>\n
 .    dateii"i4-7~2000 to the fol-fiowing effect:<\/p>\n
  a Litiga\ufb01on about the post of the
\n  between one of the mencxbers and
\n x then'; secietary i.e., my seif. The litigation went
\n seven years in the (201111 \u00e9rithout any \ufb01nal
\n conclusion. Meanwhile the Government
\nsuperceded the Society and nearly for a ywr
\nand a half gavemment appointed an
\nAdminisizatcr who maintained the fzmction of<\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n
the society. The a\u00e9mixlistrator handed   ~
\nsociety during 1990 forming a I&*Ira;1:ri’agVii{ g”.e:”‘
\ncommittee with a Iesolutionjgo    _  u
\nmanagement by adding new
\nwas done as per the   1996″\n<\/p>\n
I le\ufb01 the institution
\nelected in the   teen<\/p>\n
onward i have ;wi.\ufb013._&the <\/p>\n
Per the first \ufb01me the respeedent’-has with the following<\/p>\n
admission on”  \u00a3311:  \ufb01\u00e9lerthefetaiementz<\/p>\n
 “””  ef:ha\u00a7\u00e9;V  21 R335 lakhs
\n  “as capital xeceipts for
\n  membership and
\n   Education Society”\n<\/p>\n
    TSri4.iP’a1fthasa1*athy, learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
 that receipt of this amtmnt by the<\/p>\n
V VV _ asseeseev-__’i$ :15: in the nature of income at an but it is in the<\/p>\n
A. ‘  \ufb02ixatixxe of-i\ufb01xonoraiium and it is a capitai receipt for giving up the<\/p>\n
\u00ab  _ pQ’st.  honorary seczetaxyship and iife membership of the<\/p>\n
%    and further submits that the consideration so received<\/p>\n
 is in lieu of giving up the post which had certain status and<\/p>\n
5 . .\n<\/p>\n
)5\\.;:\u00bb;~v<\/p>\n
13<\/span><\/p>\n
position in the society. In this mgard the dccision~-\u00a7:_1 v\ufb01._k_’;t\u00a7<\/p>\n
of en’ Vs. K.R.Honnappa (1939) 180 rm 559  V itgag \u00e9ees\u00e9,<\/p>\n
Itiicd upoarx. In the said case a  of   <\/p>\n
was handed over as purse] mgncy
\npurchasing a car and it was ~– as <\/p>\n
The said decision woulribc ofV3:1o-Q;-.-:sVi\u00a3~;t;;;ncc  respondent<\/p>\n
assesses, in the instant \u00a2ases1n\u00a2e:\u00bbit:s%Tvdig\ufb01nguishah1e both on<\/p>\n
facts and on  ‘the:”f\u00a55i1:6\\’-%fi3}Vg’:\n<\/p>\n
(i)  a”  g’.’\u00a5)#}gSidCIa\ufb010H paid to the
\n____ H   personal character i.e., for
\n._    the constituency in general
\nA     pro quo for sezvices rendered
\n    the con\ufb01ibutors. Whereas in the
\nA.    it is by the way of quid pro quo namely
\n up the post the assesses was hoiding
\n‘  was paid and hence it cannot be<\/p>\n
1 characterised as money paid towards rendition of<\/p>\n
any sezvices.\n<\/p>\n
(ii) In the instant case the moaey was paid by a thinzi<\/p>\n
person namely Dr.K.R.P m to induce the<\/p>\n
14<\/span><\/p>\n
assessee to give up the Secretaxyship or life
\nmembership.\n<\/p>\n
Hence the citation above referred to relied upon ”<\/p>\n
counsei for the respondent is inapplicable to -{\ufb01e   <\/p>\n
present case.\n<\/p>\n
12. Sri.Parthasarathy,   fQr”v–?,h.\u00a2:’VI’es1’i;).1\u00a71t1ejn”‘:,
\nassessee would draw our atte1\u00a7:fb:1:i\u00bbto the~.q\ufb01ieS\ufb01o;1\u00a7 framed by
\nthe revenue for determixiaiieni\u00e9 as  the nature of<\/p>\n
the receipt by the assess’.ec:. WI’1;*\u00a3c’iT: of compcnsaizion<\/p>\n
reeeivecfi :6:    and life membership of<\/p>\n
the ass\u00e9ssee. s}ociei\u00a7,%’:e’.7u7\u00a7\u00e9’}3.i_e5::.’i,:s to be oons\ufb02exed and not as a<\/p>\n
case of   of the assesses. In this regard<\/p>\n
 –  \u00e9 upon the follcrwing decisions:<\/p>\n
   .1:  1%;4.2)V%V 5I.’\u20ac.’ri\u00a7i’1’R 157 (B0111)<\/p>\n
‘1 ‘(H M Inspector of taxes) V Barlow<\/p>\n
2: (1957) 31 rm 826 (Born)<\/p>\n
 .A  WA Gu\ufb01v CIT Bombay<\/p>\n
c.-5<\/p>\n
[(1959) 36 rm 84 (Bom;\n<\/p>\n
H S Captain V CIT Bombay<\/p>\n
4. (1959) 36 ITR 175 (SC)
\nCIT Hyci V Vazir Sultan and Sons<\/p>\n
0″\n<\/p>\n
17<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent assessee and came: to the conclusicrn.  it Via\u00e9 a<\/p>\n
revenue mceipt. We do not \ufb01nd any   <\/p>\n
from the sa1d’ \ufb01nding of \ufb01act. -\u00ab  is  <\/p>\n
mferred to above is pressed jinto  to  VV
\nwhen sold for consideration i\u00a3\u00bbbn{:bmesA ‘tin: asnk\u00e9t
\nnot pm\ufb01t or gain. This    as it was
\nthe speci\ufb01c contxzntion 51″”   n\u00bb%\u00a7_\u00a2’3″4’\u00a5c.vfc.’.t11e first Appe\ufb02atc
\nAuthority in  \ufb01xnund No.3 which<\/p>\n
reads as fo1Iow’a=;4 ‘Ij_.  ‘<\/p>\n
 “” n’n1’-n\u00e9if  CIT'{A.)VV’\u00e9Hed in stating<\/p>\n
thf\ufb02 thg\u00e9  as Goodwill as<\/p>\n
then:   nale of such goodwill.\n<\/p>\n
The  was a leased land<\/p>\n
  Z  ….. \u00abBangalore Development<\/p>\n
‘A ‘ v .,  which an annual lcasc payment<\/p>\n
   and the institution was<\/p>\n
  by the ticpartment of Education,<\/p>\n
V \u00e9\u00e9\ufb01vg\u00e9egnnicnt of Karnataka, so the question of
\n .. ,  does not arise.\n<\/p>\n
   of this speci\ufb01c contention having been taken by the<\/p>\n
T  before the Appcilatze Authority that it is not a. good will<\/p>\n
  [the assessee cannot contend contrary to the same.<\/p>\n
18<\/span><\/p>\n
15. From the foregoing discussion it has__towi5e’ <\/p>\n
that the amount received by the assesses ‘hei seated\u00bb as ‘a<\/p>\n
capital receipt since to forego life Izzeaibership or.iisee;e_tVaIiysig.ip,  <\/p>\n
there is no capital asset which has
\nassesses in favour of
\nwas not earning any income or. of” the said
\npests and by virtue of sanxe,’ ‘\u00a3:%xe.assessee did
\nnot lose monetariiy aiztzliias   amount received \ufb01um
\n\ufb01rfaramahamsa by   be termed or<\/p>\n
construed as oa;2_i;a1.re(ieipt. <\/p>\n
16.{n5’\\}ieti\u00a2?”    here in above we axe of
\nthe consir1exeeii”{5opiiiion  ii a111ount Ieeeived by the
\nassessee:’:ea1JI13i;i1i3’eV _ca1;iitai in nature as held by the
\nT\ufb01bunal \u00a5:\ufb012:’go’ught  as income from other sources.<\/p>\n
1;’?  answer the question of law foxmulated
\n V.fL\u20acI’BiIi–~8′:})t}V.\u20ac ia\u00e9favoafiof the revenue and against the assesses.
\n is  ‘accordingly. No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
  —   V  g<\/p>\n
3d\/’:\n<\/p>\n
Judge<\/p>\n
Sd\/-I
\nJudge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 Author: D.V.Shylendra Kumar Kumar Advocates} IN THE HIGH COURT ore’ KARNATAKA, DATED THIS THE 121%! DAY 01? AUG? 2909 T j u PREsEz~:[*1*”‘ % ” THE HOIWBLE MR. JUSTICE .559 . THE HON’BLE MR. Jus_f1*-:.<_:E ARA_vm;:}v-K{i.\u00a7\u00a7AR I.T.A.NO.2*g;.'\u00a7};_\u00a7);_F;'_g004 '= _ 1. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187553","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1904,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\",\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009"},"wordCount":1904,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009","name":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-21T19:59:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-h-s-ramachandra-rao-on-12-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs H.S.Ramachandra Rao on 12 August, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187553","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187553"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187553\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187553"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187553"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187553"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}