TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing assessment year 2005-06 whereby 16 flats were constructed. The property was held as investment and is also reflected in the balance sheet under the head investment . Further, the main income of the assessee is from Ramanand Kidarnath International where she is a partner. The property was let out to different tenants after the construction having been completed. The assessee has exploited the capital asset by letting out the facts constructed to different tenants and the rental income has been assessed to tax under the head income from house property‟. The capital asset has been exploited to earn property income and not as stock in trade. The land has been purchased in 2000-01 and it is only in assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder the head business income instead of capital gain . 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and his income consists of income from House Property and income from other sources. During the year, the assessee obtained loan and advanced loan to the firm and the interest earned thereon amounting to ₹ 1,18,047/- has been added to the total income by the AO. The AO also assessed the capital gains of ₹ 5,75,250/- derived on sale of flats under the head business income. By the impugned order, the CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO against which the assessee further before us. 4. We have considered the rival contentions and car ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing from the bank, hence, the partners borrowed money from the bank and advanced the funds to the firm. Thus, there has been commercial expediency in respect of borrowings made by the partner. Further, the firm has been able to show higher profits as under: Assessment Year Profit 2008-09 16,68,289 2009-10 16,15,469 2010-11 18,42,385 2011-12 45,93,408 6. The Ld. AR relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Bombay Samachar Ltd. 74 ITR 723 and als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... construction having been completed. The assessee has exploited the capital asset by letting out the facts constructed to different tenants and the rental income has been assessed to tax under the head income from house property‟. The capital asset has been exploited to earn property income and not as stock in trade. The land has been purchased in 2000-01 and it is only in assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12, 3 flats have been sold. In assessment year 2011-12, two flats have been sold and of the capital gain has been shown under the head capital gain‟ in the case of the assessee and other co-owners. In the case of the co-owner i.e. Ravi Goenka HUF, he had declared the gain as long term capital gain and the same has been accep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
