9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 4th March, 2015 is in respect of Assessment Years 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07. Thus, four appeals. 2. The Revenue urges the following common identical question of law in all the appeals for our consideration: "Whether in law and on the facts & circumstances of this case, was the Tribunal was justified in upholding the deletion made by the CIT(A) to determine the Income from house property ignoring the order of the Addl. Rent Tribunal ?" 3. We refer to the facts from Income Tax Appeal No.512 of 2016 relating to Assessment Year 2003-04. This as it is agreed position between the parties that except differences in dates and amounts, the facts and law applicable to all the four Assessment Years in appeal are iden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal income at Rs. 4.29 Crores (against declared rental income of Rs. 2.70 lakhs) by Assessment Order dated 31st December, 2010 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, the Respondent preferred an Appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. By the order dated 8th July, 2011 relating to Assessment Years 2003-04 allowed the Respondent's appeal. This, by inter alia, holding that the dispute before the Rent Control Tribunal was in respect of one of the properties which had been trespassed by M/s. Bank of Punjab Ltd., and the compensation/ mesne profit/ damages granted in respect thereof (L40) could not be compared to the rent received in respect of all other shops/premises from prote ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same has been correctly applied even in respect of other properties as that would be the rent at which it could be let. 8. We find that the above submission on behalf of the Revenue proceeds on an incorrect fundamental premise viz. that the Addl. Rent Control Tribunal had fixed a rent of Rs. 1.42 lakhs per month in respect of (L40) premises, occupied by M/s. Bank of Punjab. This is factually incorrect. The amount of Rs. 1.42 lakhs per month were directed to be paid by M/s. Bank of Punjab in eviction proceedings as mesne profits/ damages. All the other premises are let out to persons who are protected by the Rent Control Act. Moreover, no order has been passed by the Rent Control Tribunal, fixing higher rent in respect of the other pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
