Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 803 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of depreciation on Lifts - assets given on hire - area given on rent and standard deduction claimed - nexus of claim of depreciation on Fixed Assets used in maintenance business and business of Hiring of assets from which these was income with earning of rental income - Revenue stated that maintenance services provided to tenants were related to the building given on rent by the assessee and assessee has claimed deduction u/s 24(a) @ 30% of rent received and standard deduction in respect of house property income which covers deduction in respect of all repairs, maintenance charges, depreciation charges etc.- HELD THAT:- The contention of the Revenue is contrary of facts on record as assessee has not claimed standard deduction @ 30% in respect of maintenance income received and offered to tax under the head 'Business income'. There were two separate agreements for providing maintenance services with tenants. There were of maintenance income and rental income which are totally different and expenses of different business cannot have same ratios and expenses cannot be disallowed simply on the basis of ratio of income of different business. The activity of maintenance and rental income is totally separate and identifiable activity and nothing to do with area given on rent and standard deduction was claimed in respect of rental income and not in respect of maintenance charges which can be verified from the computation - The property was given on Rent and no depreciation on Property was claimed on by assessee. There was no nexus of these maintenances expenses incurred and claimed with earning of rental income. It is a fact on record that in the AY 2013-14 no disallowance has been made on the same issue and the return income has been accepted. Assessment proceedings on similar facts for AY 2011- 12 and AY 2013-14 , AY 2014-15 are completed without making any addition / disallowance in respect of same assessee on same set of facts on this issue which shows that no such disallowances and additions were made in case of same assessee on same facts in earlier as well as later years. Rule of consistency demand that the same should be allowed in the year under consideration as well as there is no change in the facts. Reliance is being placed on the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries [2013 (10) TMI 324 - SUPREME COURT] Wherein it was held that, once having accepted this position, the Assessing Officer cannot change his opinion in immediate next and previous assessment year without there being any change in facts and circumstances. Taking into consideration the action of the Revenue in the case of the assessee for different years , and considering the of judicial pronouncements we hold that no disallowances is called for in this case. Decided in favour of assessee.
|