IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI D.R.SINGH, JM AND SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM ITA NO.1172/DEL/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2003-04 M/S INDERDHANUSH ESTATE PVT.LTD., 7, SOUTH PATEL NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 008. PAN NO.AAACI1759B. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(4), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI GAUTAM JAIN, CA. RESPONDENT BY : SMT.MONA MOHANTY, DR. ORDER PER R.C.SHARMA, AM : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 27.12.2007 FOR THE AY 2003-04 WHEREIN ASSESSE E IS DISPUTING ADDITION OF RS.2,81,250/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 2. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF REAL ESTATE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE AO FOUND THAT INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY DECLARED IN THE RETURN WAS LOWER THAN WHAT WAS SHOW N IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE FILED ALONGWITH THE RETURN, ACCORDINGLY ADDITION OF RS.2,81,250/- WAS PROPOSED IN THE RENTAL INCOME PERTAINING TO THE PER IOD 1.11.2002 TO 15.12.2002. CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT TH IS PROPERTY WAS OLD TO MRS.URMILA MEHROTRA AND THE RENT RECEIVED HAS ALSO BEEN TRANSFERRED TO HER BY CHEQUE. THIS RENT WAS DULY DISCLOSED BY THE BUY ER OF THE PROPERTY IN THEIR ITA-1172/D/2008 2 RETURN OF INCOME. HOWEVER, THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT T HE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND HELD THAT RENT RECEIVED FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO THE SALE OF PROPERTY WAS TO BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ADD ITION SO MADE WAS CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND FOU ND FROM THE RECORD THAT THE PROPERTY NO.5 SIKENDRA ROAD, IST FLOOR MEA SURING 750 SQ.FT. WAS SOLD TO MRS.URMILA MEHROTRA RESIDENT OF KHATRI HOUS E, TIKAIT RAI KA TALAB, LUCKNOW, UP ON 16.12.2002 FOR RS.1,50,00,00/-. COP Y OF SALE DEED HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED. THE COMPANY HAS TRANSFERRED TH E RENT RECEIVED FROM ALCATEL INDIA LTD. AND ALCATEL TRADE INTERNATIONAL A.G. TO MRS. URMILA MEHROTRA. SIMILARLY RENT RECEIVED FROM ALLIED DOME CQ SPIRIT & WINE INDIA LTD. TRANSFERRED TO URMILA MEHROTRA. COPY OF RENT ACCOUNT AND RENT TRANSFERRED CHART HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED AND URMILA MEHROTRA SHOWN THAT RENT IN HER INCOME TAX RETURN. COPY OF INCOME TAX RETUR N AND COMPUTATION OF MRS.URMILA MEHROTRA HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT T HE RENT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER SALE OF BUILDING WAS DULY TRANSFERRE D TO THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY WHO HAD DULY DISCLOSED THE SAME IN HER RET URN OF INCOME. MERELY BECAUSE TDS WAS DEDUCTED ON RENT PAYABLE BY TENANT IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THE SAME IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THE CORRESPONDING RENTAL INCOME WAS ALREADY TRANSFERRED IN FAVOUR OF BUYER OF PROPERTY WHO PAID DUE TAX THEREON. ACCORDINGLY, TH E RENTAL INCOME WHICH ACCRUED IN THE HANDS OF THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY C OULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FACT OF INCOME H AVING BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE BUYER OF THE PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY ANY OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ITA-1172/D/2008 3 LEARNED AR THAT INCLUSION OF THE SAME RENTAL INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ALSO IS DEVOID OF ANY MERIT. ACCO RDINGLY, WE REVERSE THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND ALLOW THE APPEA L IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH OCTOBER, 2009. SD/- SD/- (D.R.SINGH) (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 15.10.2009. VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY REGISTRAR