Receipt vs remittance of income

In Icai study material final, in one illustration, rent from property in London deposited in a bank in London and subsequently remitted to India, has been taxed in the hands of resident and ordinarily resident in India for AY 18-19. Is this not inconsistent with the principle that "only first receipt must be taxed and remittance of income received must not be taxed in the hands of the subsequent receiver or at the subsequent place of remittance" ?