TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1813X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly to claim standard deduction u/s 24(a) which is higher than the depreciation comparative to repairs and maintenance. Assessee has not filed copy of Memorandum of Association of Assessee Company for the reasons best known to them. The Audit report filed by the assessee reveals that nature of business or profession is Boat pleasure, Cruising, renting of properties [para 8(a)] and there is no change in the nature of business or profession. The ratio of the various decisions is not applicable as the facts of the present case are at variance. We have seen that the order of ld CIT (A) is reasoned one and does not require any interference at our end. Appeal of the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No. 7086/Mum/2014 - - - Dated:- 8-3-2017 - SHRI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A), the action of AO was confirmed. Thus, further aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 3. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the Revenue and perused the material available on record. Ld. AR of the assessee argued that for the Financial Year (FY) under consideration, the assessee has shown rental income of ₹ 1,20,00,000/- under the head Income from House Property and claimed standard deduction u/s 24(a) of the Act @ 30% i.e. ₹ 36,00,000/-. The AO treated the rental income under the head Profit Gain from Business and Profession holding that rental income was consistently offered as Bu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... standard deduction @ 30%, the assessee has shown letting income under the head Income from House Property whereas the actual expenses incurred by the assessee on repair and maintenance of property is only ₹ 76,085/-. No justification was provided by assessee for divergent approach for the AY under consideration. The nature of activities, modus operendi, manner of keeping record and presentation of rental income in the year under consideration 5. are same as in the preceding years. The assessee intends to change the head of income only to reduce its tax liability. 6. We have considered the rival contention of the parties and gone through the orders of authorities below. The assessing officer while making assessment noticed from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellate authority the facts were independently examined by ld CIT(A) qua the issue raised by assessee. The ld CIT(A) asked the assessee to furnish the details of block of asset leased and the details of depreciation claimed from the AY 2004-05 till AY 2010-11. No details were furnished by assessee till 17/07/2014. Some statements regarding the queries raised by ld CIT(A) were filed by assessee on 28/08/2014, from which the facts were not verifiable as to which are the asset used for Marine training. The ld CIT(A) concluded that assessee company executed two agreements , one in respect of buildings and other in respect of furniture and fixture. The assessee company derived the benefits claiming depreciation all the years and now has change ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
