5.19 As regards to the above submissions, the MAAR took the contention that the Appellant has not made any detailed submission stating actual percentage of the owner/c o-owners in the said property. However, the Appellant has submitted the Agreeme nts of coownership of the said immovable property before the MAAR. Agreement provides the details of actual percentage of ownership/co-ownership in the said property. 5.20 The Appellant also submits that each of the co-owners receives the rental mcome proportionate to their share in the immovable property and the income tax authority assesses him separately on the income so received. Merely because several persons jointly own an immovable property, they cannot be treated as 'an association of persons' or 'a body of individuals'. It is observed that the similar view is taken in the case of M/s. SRI RABI SANKAR TAH [2019-TIOL-418-AAR-GST] Case No. 34 of 2019 wherein it has been held that "The Applicant and the other two co-owners cannot be treated as an association of persons and, there lore, as a person defined under section 2(84) of the GST Act, where their income from renting is separately ascertainable and assessed for income tax individually at the hand of each co-owner. Whether the Applicant is required to be registered under section 22( I) of the G5I Act will, therefore, depend on his gross turnover, ascertained separately from the other coowners, exceeding the threshold as provided under the Act."
