TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd deviate from its earlier stand. Thus the Tribunal is right. - 567 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2010 - M. M. KUMAR and JITENDRA CHAUHAN JJ. Yogesh Putney for the appellant. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by 1. M. M. Kumar J.-The Revenue has approached this court by filing the instant appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for brevity "the Act") challenging the order dated March 25, 2009, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (for brevity "the Tribunal") in I.T.A. No. 1056/Chd/2008 in respect of the assessment year 2005-06. The Revenue has claimed that the following substantial questions of law would arise for determination of this court : "Whether on the facts and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 1,16,50,981 under the head "Income from house property" after claiming deduction under section 24 of the Act. It had claimed that similar deductions were made in the earlier years. An identical issue arose in the assessment years 1997-98, 1998-99 and 2002-03 and the Tribunal had accepted such income as "income from house property". How-ever, the Assessing Officer went into further details to record a contrary finding to the effect that the income derived by the assessee-respondent has been in the nature of business income. It is thus evident that an identical issue in respect of the assessment year 1997-98 was decided in favour of the assessee-respondent. On an appeal filed by the Revenue being I.T.A. No. 812/Chandi/2001 it was held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of the assessee-respondent has prevailed because a similar issue was raised before the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 5651/ Del./1997. The aforesaid view of the Delhi Bench was followed by the Chandigarh Bench also in I. T. A. Nos. 825 and 875/Chandi/1999 in the case of Haryana Hotels Ltd. decided on April 8, 2004. Even in the case of the assessee-respondent a similar view has been followed in I. T. A. No. 755/Chandi/2002. Accordingly, the aforesaid ground also would not stand scrutiny of the principle of consistency as laid down in various judgments referred to in the preceding paragraph. Therefore, questions Nos. 3 and 4 would also deserve to be answered against the Revenue-appellant and in favour of the assessee-respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
