{"id":88105,"date":"1984-08-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1984-08-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984"},"modified":"2018-02-13T13:13:59","modified_gmt":"2018-02-13T07:43:59","slug":"commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","title":{"rendered":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1987 AIR 1867, \t\t  1985 SCR  (1) 613<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: E Venkataramiah<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Venkataramiah, E.S. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CALCUTTA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDALHOUSIE PROPERTIES LTD.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/08\/1984\n\nBENCH:\nVENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)\nBENCH:\nVENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J)\nERADI, V. BALAKRISHNA (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1987 AIR 1867\t\t  1985 SCR  (1) 613\n 1984 SCC  (4) 388\t  1984 SCALE  (2)215\n\n\nACT:\n     Income-tax Act,  1961-Proviso to  section 23  (1) it as\nstood in  the assessment year 1966-67-For determining annual\nvalue of  property assessee  entitled to  claim deduction of\ntotal liability\t of municipal taxes whether actually paid or\nnot.\n     Words and phrases-Expression 'borne'-Scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     While determining\tthe annual  value  of  the  property\nwhich was liable to income-tax for the assessment year 1966-\n67 under the head \"Income from house property\" under section\n22 of  the Income-tax  Act,  1961,  the\t respondent-assessee\nclaimed that  the total liability for municipal taxes levied\nby the corporation, whether actually paid or not and whether\nthe extent  of liability  questioned or\t not, was deductible\nunder the  priviso  to\tsection\t 23  (1)  of  the  Act.\t The\ndepartment rejected  the  claim.  The  Income-tax  Appellate\nTribunal allowed  the claim.  On a  reference being made the\nHigh Court  held in  favour of\tthe assessee.  Therefore the\ndepartment filed this petition for special leave to appeal.\n     Dismissing the petition,\n^\n     HELD: The\tonly point  is whether the expression 'borne\nby the\towner' which  appeared in  the proviso to section 23\n(1) as\tit stood  in the  year 1966-67\twould refer  to\t the\namount of tax which the owner was liable to pay or amount of\ntax  which   he\t had  actually\tpaid  in  discharge  of\t the\nliability. It  is true that the expression 'borne' may refer\nto  either  the\t liability  which  a  person  is  liable  to\ndischarge or the actual sum paid by him in discharge of that\nliability. But\twe agree  with the  High Court\tthat in\t the\npresent context\t it should  be construed as referring to the\nformer namely,\tthe amount  of tax which the owner is liable\nto discharge  as stated\t in the proviso to section 23 (1) of\nthe Act\t and not  the latter one. The reason for taking this\nview flows from the scheme of the Act itself. [616D-F]\n     <a href=\"\/doc\/198371\/\">Bhagwan Dass  Jain v.  Union of  India,<\/a> [1981] 2 S.C.R.\n808; referred to.\n     In the  instant case  it is  not, therefore.  necessary\nthat the  assessee should  have actually  paid the amount of\ntax in\tquestion  before  such\tdeduction  is  claimed.\t The\nposition is  not also  different even where the assessee has\ndis-\n614\nputed  the   correctness  of   the  levy  before  the  local\nauthorities concerned.\tA mere expectation of success in the\nproceedings in\twhich the  assessee has\t disputed such\tlevy\ndoes not  disentitle him  to the  statutory deduction on the\nbasis of the levy which is in force. [617B-C]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Civil)<br \/>\n\t\t     No. 3786 of 1982.\n<\/p>\n<p>     From the Judgement and Order dated the 21st April, 1978<br \/>\nof the\tCalcutta High  Court in Income Tax Reference No. 573<br \/>\nof 1971.\n<\/p>\n<p>     K.C. Dua and Miss A. Subhashini for the Petitioner.<br \/>\n     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     VENKATARAMIAH, J.\tThis Special Leave Petition is filed<br \/>\nunder Article 136 of the Constitution by the Commissioner of<br \/>\nIncome-tax, West  Bengal, Calcutta  against the\t decision of<br \/>\nthe High  Court of  Calcutta in Income-tax Reference No. 573<br \/>\nof 1971.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The respondent,  Dalhousie Properties  Limited  was  an<br \/>\nassessee  under\t  the  Income-tax   Act,  1961\t(hereinafter<br \/>\nreferred to  as &#8216;the  Act&#8217;) in\tthe assessment year 1966-67,<br \/>\nthe relevant  previous year  being the year ending March 31,<br \/>\n1966. It  owned extensive  properties and  its\tincome\tfrom<br \/>\nrents realised\twas substantial.  In the  assessment year in<br \/>\nquestion, the  assessee claimed\t a deduction of Rs. 1,78,784<br \/>\nwhich represented  the tax  levied  by\tthe  Corporation  of<br \/>\nCalcutta as  a deductible  item while  computing its  income<br \/>\nfrom house  property.  It  appears  that  the  assessee\t had<br \/>\nquestioned the\textent of liability which had just then been<br \/>\nenhanced before\t the Corporation and on that account had not<br \/>\nactually paid  the whole  of it. This led to a difference of<br \/>\nopinion between the department and the assessee.\n<\/p>\n<p>     In course\tof time the dispute regarding the assessment<br \/>\nof the\tliability of  the assessee under the Act reached the<br \/>\nIncome-tax Appellate  Tribunal. The  Tribunal held  that the<br \/>\ntotal liability for municipal taxes which the assessee could<br \/>\nclaim by  way of  deduction under  the proviso to section 23<br \/>\n(1) of\tthe Act\t in respect  of\t the  buildings\t during\t the<br \/>\naccounting year\t was Rs.  1,78,784 and\tthat the said amount<br \/>\nwas to\tbe allowed  as a  deduction irrespective of the fact<br \/>\nthat the  assessee had\traised a dispute about the extent of<br \/>\nthe liability  before the  Corporation and that the assessee<br \/>\nhad not paid the whole of it to the Corporation of Calcutta.<br \/>\nAggrieved by the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">615<\/span><br \/>\nabove decision\tof the\tTribunal,  the\tDepartment  got\t the<br \/>\nfollowing question  referred to the High Court under section<br \/>\n256 (1) of the Act:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>     &#8220;Whether on  the facts  and in the circumstances of the<br \/>\n     case the  Tribunal was  right in  holding that the full<br \/>\n     taxes levied  by the Corporation of Rs. 1,78,784 should<br \/>\n     be deducted under section 23 (1) of the Income-tax Act,<br \/>\n     1961?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     The High  Court answered  the  above  question  in\t the<br \/>\naffirmative and\t in favour of the assessee. This petition is<br \/>\nfiled against the said decision of the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The material  part of  section 23,\t as it\tstood in the<br \/>\nassessment year 1966-67 read as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8220;23. Annual  value  how  determined.-(1)  For\t the<br \/>\n     purposes of section 22 the annual value of any property<br \/>\n     shall be  deemed to  be the  sum for which the property<br \/>\n     might reasonably be expected to let from year to year:<br \/>\n\t  Provided  that   where  the  property\t is  in\t the<br \/>\n     occupation of  a tenant  and the  taxes levied  by\t any<br \/>\n     local authority  in respect  of the  property are under<br \/>\n     the   law authorising  such levy  payable wholly by the<br \/>\n     owner, or partly by the owner and partly by the tenant,<br \/>\n     a deduction  shall be  made equal to the part if any of<br \/>\n     the tenant&#8217;s liability borne by the corner&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     Under section  22 of  the Act  what  is  chargeable  to<br \/>\nincome-tax under  the head  &#8216;Income from  house property&#8217; is<br \/>\nthe annual  value of property consisting of any buildings or<br \/>\nlands appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner<br \/>\nother than  such portions  of such property as he may occupy<br \/>\nfor the\t purpose of any business or profession carried on by<br \/>\nhim the\t profits of  which are\tchargeable to income-tax. As<br \/>\nexplained by  this Court  in <a href=\"\/doc\/198371\/\">Bhagwan  Dass Jain\t v. Union of<br \/>\nIndia<\/a>(1) income-tax  is\t payable  under\t this  provision  in<br \/>\nrespect of  the bona  fide  annual  value  of  the  property<br \/>\ndetermined as  provided in section 23 of the Act. Section 23<br \/>\n(1) laid  down the  principle according\t to which the annual<br \/>\nvalue of any property could be<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">616<\/span><br \/>\n     nationally\t determined   during  the  relevant  period.<br \/>\nFirst, the  sum for  which the\tproperty in  question  might<br \/>\nreasonably be  expected to  let from  year to year had to be<br \/>\nascertained. From  that as per the proviso to section 23 (1)<br \/>\nof the\tAct where  the property\t was in\t the occupation of a<br \/>\ntenant, if  taxes levied  by a local authority in respect of<br \/>\nit were to be borne by the owner, they had to be deducted to<br \/>\nthe extent  mentioned therein  and  the\t balance  should  be<br \/>\ndeemed to  be the  annual value which would be liable to tax<br \/>\nsubject to  the other  provisions of  the Act. The object of<br \/>\nthe proviso  was that  where the  tenant of the property had<br \/>\nundertaken to bear any part of the taxes levied by the local<br \/>\nauthority, the owner could not be allowed to claim deduction<br \/>\nin respect  of it. It may be stated here that the proviso to<br \/>\nsection 23 (1) as it stood at the relevant time had not been<br \/>\nhappily worded. It has been since suitably modified.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The only  point canvassed\tbefore the  High  Court\t and<br \/>\nbefore us  is whether  the expression  &#8216;borne by  the owner&#8217;<br \/>\nwould refer  to the amount of tax which the owner was liable<br \/>\nto pay\tor the\tamount of  tax which he had actually paid in<br \/>\ndischarge of  the  said\t liability.  It\t is  true  that\t the<br \/>\nexpression &#8216;borne&#8217; may refer to either the liability which a<br \/>\nperson is  liable to discharge or the actual sum paid by him<br \/>\nin discharge  of that  liability. But we agree with the High<br \/>\nCourt that  in the present context it should be construed as<br \/>\nreferring to  the former namely, the amount of tax which the<br \/>\nowner is  liable to  discharge as  stated in  the proviso to<br \/>\nsection 23 (1) of the Act and not the latter one. The reason<br \/>\nfor taking  this view  flows from  the\tscheme\tof  the\t Act<br \/>\nitself. As  mentioned earlier, the expression &#8216;annual value&#8217;<br \/>\nis a  national figure  and it  does not\t refer to any actual<br \/>\nreceipt. It is arrived at by deducting the taxes levied by a<br \/>\nlocal authority\t for paying  which the owner has assumed the<br \/>\nresponsibility from  the sum  for which\t the property  might<br \/>\nreasonably be  expected to  let from  year to  year.  It  is<br \/>\nreasonable to  treat the annual value of a house property as<br \/>\nremaining more\tor less\t constant during  the entire  period<br \/>\ncovered by  any given previous year except perhaps where the<br \/>\ntax liability  itself is  modified by  the  local  authority<br \/>\nconcerned. It  cannot keep  on changing\t as  and  when\tsome<br \/>\npayment towards\t the tax  liability  imposed  by  the  local<br \/>\nauthority is  made by the assessee during the year. In order<br \/>\nto ensure  that there  is no  unwarranted fluctuation in the<br \/>\nannual value during the year in question such actual payment<br \/>\nshould be  eliminated from  consideration but  only the\t tax<br \/>\nliability imposed by the local<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">617<\/span><br \/>\nauthority  which   the\tassessee   is  liable\tto  pay\t  as<br \/>\ncontemplated by\t the proviso  to section  23(1) of  the\t Act<br \/>\nshould be allowed to be deducted  under the said proviso. It<br \/>\nis not,\t therefore, necessary  that the assessee should have<br \/>\nactually paid  the amount  of tax  in question\tbefore\tsuch<br \/>\ndeduction is  claimed. The  position is\t not also  different<br \/>\neven where  the assessee has disputed the correctness of the<br \/>\nlevy be.  fore\tthe  local  authorities\t concerned.  A\tmere<br \/>\nexpection of success in the proceedings in which the asessee<br \/>\nhas disputed  such levy\t does  not  disentitle\thim  to\t the<br \/>\nstatuory deduction  on the  basis of  the levy\twhich is  in<br \/>\nforce.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The High  Court was,  therefore, right  in deciding the<br \/>\ncase in favour of the assessee.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The Special Leave Petition is therefore, dismissed.<br \/>\nH.S.K.\t  Petition dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">618<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 Equivalent citations: 1987 AIR 1867, 1985 SCR (1) 613 Author: E Venkataramiah Bench: Venkataramiah, E.S. (J) PETITIONER: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CALCUTTA Vs. RESPONDENT: DALHOUSIE PROPERTIES LTD. DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/08\/1984 BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) BENCH: VENKATARAMIAH, E.S. (J) ERADI, V. [&hellip;]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-88105","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-13T07:43:59+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984\",\"datePublished\":\"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-13T07:43:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\"},\"wordCount\":1293,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\",\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-13T07:43:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984\"}]},{\"@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":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-13T07:43:59+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984","datePublished":"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-13T07:43:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984"},"wordCount":1293,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984","name":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax ... vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1984-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-13T07:43:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/commissioner-of-income-tax-vs-dalhousie-properties-ltd-on-23-august-1984#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Commissioner Of Income-Tax &#8230; vs Dalhousie Properties Ltd on 23 August, 1984"}]},{"@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\/88105","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=88105"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/88105\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=88105"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=88105"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=88105"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}