Skip to content


(Vellanki) Lakshmi Narasayamma Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1929Mad598
Appellant(Vellanki) Lakshmi Narasayamma Rao
RespondentCommissioner of Income-tax
Excerpt:
- .....executrix, gave her a life-estate in the property and directed her to give his daughters a sum of rs. 600 each per month. this sum of rs. 600 was not paid and it fell into arrears. the daughter got a decree for rs. 80,000 in the sub-court of bezwada and this sum is taxed as income.2. it is argued for the assessee that she got a rent charge on the income of the estate in respect of the amount that the (executrix had to pay and that this sum of rs. 600 should be treated as agricultural income as defined in section 2, clause 1. we think that this legacy cannot be brought under that clause and that she was rightly assessed on the amount she realized as arrears of maintenance. we answer the reference accordingly and direct that the assessee should pay rs. 250 as costs of this reference.
Judgment:

Wallace, J.

1. The only question in this case is whether the legacy received by the assessee under the terms of her father's will and in respect of which she got a decree is exempt from the payment of income-tax being agricultural income. Her father was the zamindar of Gannavaram and he executed a will which is annexed as Ex. O. Under the will he appointed his wife as the executrix, gave her a life-estate in the property and directed her to give his daughters a sum of Rs. 600 each per month. This sum of Rs. 600 was not paid and it fell into arrears. The daughter got a decree for Rs. 80,000 in the Sub-Court of Bezwada and this sum is taxed as income.

2. It is argued for the assessee that she got a rent charge on the income of the estate in respect of the amount that the (executrix had to pay and that this sum of Rs. 600 should be treated as agricultural income as defined in Section 2, Clause 1. We think that this legacy cannot be brought under that clause and that she was rightly assessed on the amount she realized as arrears of maintenance. We answer the reference accordingly and direct that the assessee should pay Rs. 250 as costs of this reference.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //