Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (2) TMI 314

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ure of amenities provided - Decided against Revenue. - ITA Nos. 1013 & 1014/HYD/2013 - - - Dated:- 5-2-2014 - Shri Chandra Poojari And Shri Saktijit Dey,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Solgy Jose T. Kottaram for Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidia For the Respondent : Shri V. Shiv Kumar ORDER Per Chandra Poojari, A. M. These appeals preferred by the Revenue are directed against the separate orders of CIT(A)-V Hyderabad dated 04/03/2013 for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06. Since common issues are involved in both these appeals, they were clubbed and heard together and, therefore, a common order is passed for the sake of convenience. 2. The grounds raised by revenue in both these appeals are common, which are as follows: "1 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as income from other sources. The Assessing Officer also relied on the decision of Apex Court in the case of Sultan Bros. Pvt. Vs. CIT. 4. On appeal before the CIT(A), it was submitted that the appellant, as owner of building 5-9-22, Secretariat Road, Saifabad, let out the building to various parties during subject assessment year and earned rent of Rs. 2,06,26,866/- and claimed the same as rent in the Profit Loss Account. This amount was received vide two separate agreements with some tenants of the building, one as rent and the other agreement towards amenities. According to the appellant, this break up was done to lessen the municipal taxes as municipal taxes are levied only on rent and not on amenities charges collected. The charge .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing Officer had not brought out any specific services I amenities provided by the assessee in f the agreement for amenities charges. On the other hand, the appellant also except claiming that they have entered into two separate agreements - one for rent and another for amenities charges to reduce their municipal tax liability, had not brought out any other reason for entering into two separate agreements. The reason so adduced by the appellant also is not prima-facie acceptable. 5.1 The CIT(A) further observed that however, considering the totality of the facts and the other cases laws relied upon by the both parties, it is seen that no clinching evidence was brought out by the both parties in support of their respective arguments. Leavin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... grievance of the Department is that apart from letting out the premises and collecting electricity and water charges, the assessee provided specific services/amenities and, therefore, the income derived by the assessee can be treated as 'income from other sources' and not as 'income from house property.' In this connection, the CIT(A) gave a categorical finding that "in the absence of any facts brought out by the AO of the nature of amenities provided by the assessee and also going by the conspicuous absence of any separate claim towards maintenance charges by the assessee, I am inclined to accept the version of the assessee to treat the entire receipts as 'income from house property.'" In this connection, we refer to the judgment of the Ho .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was only exploiting the property as owner by leasing out the same and realising income by way of rent. Such rental income is liable to be assessed under the head 'income from house property'. The Tribunal was in error in holding otherwise. Accordingly, the expenses incurred for the purpose of letting out of the properties could not be allowed as business expenditure." 7.1 Moreover, in the case of Shambu Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, 263 ITR 143(SC), on which reliance placed by the assessee, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "income derived by assessee by letting out furnished premises on monthly rent basis to various parties along with furniture, fixtures, light, air-conditioners, etc., for being used as "table space" and also providin .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates