ITO, Panchkula V. M/s Polo Hotels Ltd., Panchkula

ITA 1044/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8887 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1044 & 1045/CHD/2016 A.Y: 2010-11 & 2011-12 THE ITO, VS M/S POLO HOTEL LTD., WARD 3, # 67, INDUSTRIAL AREA, PANCHKULA. PHASE-1, PANCHKULA. PAN: AABCP0940L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VINEET KRISHAN DATE OF HEARING : 21.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.12.2016 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM BOTH THE APPEALS BY REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) PANCHKULA DATE D 29.07.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011 AND 2011-1 2 ON THE COMMON GROUND OF APPEAL THAT WHETHER LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT LEASE INCOME DECLARED BY ASSESSEE IS BUSINESS INCOME AND NOT INC OME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT ASSESSEE GAVE ITS BUIL DING ALONGWITH FURNITURE FIXTURE ETC. ON LEASE FROM 26.09.2001 FOR 15 YEARS AND 5 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED RENTAL INCOME BY LEASING OUT ENTIRE PROPER TY ON WHICH BUSINESS WAS BEING CARRIED OUT EARLIER BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DONE ANY INDEPENDEN T BUSINESS EXCEPT RECEIVING RENT FROM HOT MILLION FOO DS PVT. LTD. THE NATURE OF PAYMENT WAS RENTAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER CONSIDERING EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE HELD THAT THE INCOME WAS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER ALSO DID NOT AL LOW BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT. 3. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) THAT FACTS OF THIS CASE ARE SAME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WITH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2012-13 IN WHICH THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) HAS ALREADY ALLOWED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 04- 05 ON THE IDENTICAL ISSUE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED TH AT DEPARTMENT HAS WITHDRAWN THEIR PENDING APPEALS FROM HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AS PER BOARDS CIRCULAR. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT HE HAD DECIDED THE SIMILAR ISSUE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-1 3 3 VIDE ORDER DATED 30.07.2015 IN WHICH HE HAS DIRECTE D THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASSESS THE INCOME AS BUSIN ESS INCOME AND ALSO DIRECTED TO ALLOW BUSINESS EXPENSES CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE, ACCORDINGLY, ALLOWED. THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 HAVE B EEN REPRODUCED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DA TED 30.07.2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ALSO REMAINE D IN APPEAL IN ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN ITA NO. 749/2015 AND VIDE ORDER DATED 27.11.2015, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS BEEN DISMISSED. COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RECORD. HE HAS, THEREFORE, SUBM ITTED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. T HE LD. DR ADMITTED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR VARIOUS YEARS AS WELL AS DATED 27.11.2015 (SUPRA). 5. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT O F THE ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL REFERRED TO ABOVE, IT IS CLE AR THAT ISSUE HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL BY DISMISSING DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL F OR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 VIDE ORDER DATED 27.11.2015 . 4 THE DEPARTMENT APPEALS HAVE, THUS, NO MERIT, SAME A RE, ACCORDINGLY, DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (BHAVNESH S AINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21 ST DECEMBER,2016. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD