ITO 5(3)-2, MUMBAI V. SHUKRA JEWELLERY LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1052/MUM/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1689 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 20-05-2010
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-02-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRAVAN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH REGORA
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL, AM AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM ITA NO.1052/MUM/2009 : ASST.YEAR 2006-2007 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3)-2 MUMBAI. VS. M/S.SHUKRA JEWELLERY LIMITED 232, PANCHRATNA, OPERA HOUSE MUMBAI 400 004. PA NO.AAACS7962C. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHRAVAN KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MAHESH REGORA O R D E R PER R.S.SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON 16.12.2008 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007. 2. THE ONLY GROUND IS AGAINST THE COMPUTATION OF IN COME AT RS.29,46,580 AS BUSINESS INCOME INSTEAD OF HOUSE PROPERTY. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1995-96 WHICH WAS GIVEN TO SHRI CHANDRAKANT SHAH, DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEPRE CIATION AND OTHER EXPENSES AT RS.21,08,044 AND RS.1,79,029 IN RESPECT OF THIS PRE MISES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THIS RESIDENTIAL FLAT WAS TREATED AS HO USE PROPERTY OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND THE RENTAL VALUE WAS TAXED UNDER THE HEAD `INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. HE REFERRED TO THE FINDING GIVEN BY HIS PREDECESSORS IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97, 1998-99, 1999-2000 AND 2001-2002. THE ASSE SSEE WENT IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-2002 AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) OVERTURNED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THIS POINT BY RE LYING ON THE ORDER PASSED BY HIS PREDECESSOR CIT(A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1996-97, 19 98-99 AND 1999-2000. THE ITA NO.1052/MUM/2009 M/S.SHUKRA JEWELLERY LIMITED. 2 A.O. FURTHER RECORDED THE FACT THAT THE DEPARTMENTA L APPEAL AGAINST THE CIT(A)S ORDER FOR SUCH YEARS WERE DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND SUCH DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT FINALLY ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE. F OLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN BY HIM IN THE EARLIER YEARS, HE WORKED OUT THE RENTAL VALUE AT RS.42,09,400 SUBJECT TO ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S.24(1). IN THE FIRST APPE AL, THE LEARNED CIT(A) DID NOT APPROVE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AT RS.29,46,580 BY RELYING ON THE TRIBUNAL ORDER FOR E ARLIER YEARS. THE REVENUE HAS COME UP IN APPEAL AGAINST THIS FINDING GIVEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD IT IS NOTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RELI ED ON THE TRIBUNALS ORDER FOR EARLIER YEARS ON THE SAME ISSUE. NOTHING HAS BEEN B ROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE INDICATING THAT THE TRIBUNAL ORDER FOR SUCH EARLIER YEAR HAVE BEEN REVERSED OR MODIFIED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT, WE UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THIS ISSUE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 31 ST DAY OF MAY 2010. SD/- SD/- ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) ( R.S.SYAL ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER MUMBAI : 31 ST MAY, 2010 . DEVDAS* ITA NO.1052/MUM/2009 M/S.SHUKRA JEWELLERY LIMITED. 3 COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENTS. 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-V, MUMBAI. 5. THE DR/ITAT, MUMBAI. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.