Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 308 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - Directions for assessee's income derived from holiday homes under its ownership has to be assessed as income from house property and that from the other holiday homes is to be treated as income from “other” sources - HELD THAT:- We find no reason to sustain the PCIT’s foregoing stand that the assessee's income derived from its holiday homes has to be bifurcated on ownership basis (supra). CIT(DR) fails to dispute that the AO had very examined the very issue and assessed the assessee’s income from the said holiday homes under the business head than that claimed as income from other sources - PCIT’s observations that the assessee could not demonstrate that “the income from holiday homes as disclosed by it was in any manner whatsoever was examined” during assessment; turns out to be factually incorrect since the AO had not only carried out necessary enquiries but also he changed the head of its income from “other sources” to business Hon’ble Delhi high court in ITO vs. D.G. Housing Projects Ltd. [2012 (3) TMI 227 - DELHI HIGH COURT] hold that the twin limbs of no enquiry or inadequate enquiry and an erroneous decision by the assessing authority stand on a different footing and the CIT cannot simply remand the issue back for afresh assessment qua the latter. Issue of the assessment of assessee's income derived from holiday homes claimed as income from other sources in the computation but held as income from business during assessment in subsequent AY 2015-16; stands decided in its favour in the CIT(A)'s order much prior to the PCIT's issuing Section 263 show cause notice dated 11.04.2018. This tribunal’s decision in the Kolkata Reserve Bank Employees Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. [2018 (3) TMI 1825 - ITAT KOLKATA] holds that such an income from holiday homes is not eligible for Section 80P(2)(i) deduction being not business income. It is crystal clear therefore that the head of assessee’s income derived from its holiday homes i.e. whether it is income from house property as per the PCIT, business income going by the AO in assessment and the CIT(A) and the residuary had of “other” sources in its computation; respectively, is purely a debatable issue. It thus could not be held that that the Assessing Officer’s action sought to be revised as erroneous and causing prejudice to interest of the Revenue. In landmark decision in Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. vs. CIT [2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME COURT] holds that both these conditions need to simultaneously exist before Section 263 revision is set in motion. PCIT’s action under challenge is not sustainable since the AO had taken one of the possible views only in this factual backdrop. It is reversed therefore. AO’s regular assessment dated 03.06.2016 is restored as a necessary corollary. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|