Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2008 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (6) TMI 313 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA - Industrial park - Nature of Income from renting - Business income or income from house property or income from other sources - CIT(A) held that the income in the nature of lease rentals from lease of the information technology park as considered by the AO should be charged to tax under the head 'Income from house property' - HELD THAT:- We are of the considered view that the assessee was incorporated with the sole intention of developing technology park for which it obtained leasehold land from the Karnataka Industrial Development Corporation and also obtained loan from Union Bank of India for constructing superstructure thereon which could not be considered as investment in a property for earning rental income only. The lease of the property was shown as part of the business activity, the income received therefrom cannot be said as income received as a land owner but as a trader. The conversion from leasehold to ownership led to a pure commercial proposition resulting in a business venture carried out by the assessee company. We find force in the submission of learned counsel that the term 'business', as defined in the provision of infrastructure facility as provided in sub-cl. (iv) of s. 80-IA clearly explains the development and operation of the technology park has not been controverted by the authorities below. The main intention was to exploit the immovable property by way of commercial application which applies to the assessee's case and would leave no room for doubting that the intention of the assessee was in providing software development facility in the electronic city in the industrial area within the limits of Bangalore South District, Bangalore. Any activity undertaken with a profit motive would amount to business and not mere a return on investment when it is exploited. The Tribunal decision was relied upon by the apex Court decision rendered by a Bench consisting of four Judges whereas the decision of the same Court in East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. vs. CIT [1960 (11) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] was rendered by a Bench of three Judges, will have a binding force who further held that the facts in the similar to that of decision in the case of Sri Balaji Enterprises [1997 (2) TMI 91 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] in which decision the Karnataka High Court held it as business income. We are therefore inclined to consider the learned counsel contention that the facts of the assessee's case are similar to those of Sri Balaji Enterprises [1997 (2) TMI 91 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and also S.G. Mercantile Corporation (P) Ltd. [1972 (1) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT]. In view thereof, we direct the AO to assess the rental income as from business by setting aside the order of the learned CIT(A) on this issue. This being the sole ground agitated before us is held in assessee's favour. In the result, the appeal is allowed.
|