TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 167X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in favour of assessee - I.T.A. No.563/Mum/2013, I.T.A. No.562/Mum/2013, I.T.A. No.5202/Mum/2013, I.T.A. No.564/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 2-6-2016 - SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM For The Assessee : Smt.Keyuri Desai For The Revenue : Shri Sanjeev Jain ORDER PER BENCH: These are four appeals under consideration. These four appeals are directed against the four separate orders of CIT(A) of the respective date and for the respective assessment years. Since, these appeals pertain to the same assessee, therefore, for the sake of convenience; they are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of in this consolidated order. Appeal wise adjudication is given in the succeeding paragraphs. 2. With r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The assessee pleaded before the CIT(A), that the delay was solely due to bonafide reasons and otherwise also the assessee is not going to gain any benefit by delaying the appeal. The CIT(A) has just summarily rejected the reasons given by the assessee. In view of the reasons given by the assessee, we condone the delay caused in filing the appeal before CIT(A) and admit the appeal. Accordingly, restore the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. 4. This appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Now we will deal with I.T.A. No.563/Mum/2013. 5. The only issue in this appeal of the assessee is with regard to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in taxing the receipt from BPL Mobile Commu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst income from other sources as assessed by the AO. The observation of the Tribunal are as under(para 6 7): 6. Having carefully heard the submission of the learned Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record we find that the facts are not in dispute. We further find that the issue is covered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by the orders of the Tribunal. In the case of Sharda Chamber Premises v. ITO in ITA No. 1234/Mum/2008, dt. 1st Sept., 2009 for asst. yr. 2003-04 in which JM was one of the party, on the similar facts, the Tribunal after considering the decision in ITO v. Cuffe Parade Sainara Premises Co-operative Society Ltd. ITA No. 7225/Mum/2005, dt. 28th April, 2008 for asst. yr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the view that the letting out of the terrace has to be assessed under the head income from house property subject to deduction under s. 24 of the Act as against income from other sources assessed by the AO. We hold and order accordingly. The ground taken by the assessee is, therefore, allowed. When this was put to the ld.DR, he only relied only on the orders of lower authorities. 8. We have gone through the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Matru Ashish Co-operative Housing Society Ltd (supra), which is exactly on identical facts decided the issue that the income of the assessee-society is to be assessed as income from house property and not business income. Accordingly, respectfully following the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
