Multivision Infotech Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-1(4), Ahmedabad

ITA 161/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9287 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 11-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B
• Assessee Lawyers: PRITESH L SHAH
• Keywords: Business income; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO.1 61 / AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 0 9 - 10 P AGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD B BENCH, AHMEDABAD [CORAM : PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND KUL BHARAT JM] ITA NO.1 61 /AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 9 - 10 MULTIVISION INFOTECH PVT. LTD. ...... .APPELLANT 2 ND FLOOR, NARAYAN CHAMBERS, NEAR PATANG HOTEL, NEHRU BRIDGE CORNER, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD. [PAN: AACCM 2016 P] VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, . RESPONDENT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(4) AHMEDABAD. APPEARANCES BY: PRITESH L. SHAH , FOR THE APPELLANT B. PANDA , FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 11 TH , 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MARCH 8 TH , 201 6 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR , AM : 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE A SSESS EE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNE SS OF THE ORDER DATED 13 TH DECEMBER , 201 2 , PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 14 4 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ( THE ACT HEREINAFTER) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 10, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND: - THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRE D IN T REATING BUSINESS INCOME FROM LETTING OUT THE PROPERTY AS INCOME FROM HOUSE P R OPERLY , DISALLOWING ALL THE EXPENSES OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND ENHANCING THE INCOME TO RS.3,31,772/ - , THE INCOME FROM LETTING OUT THE PROPERTY IS REQUESTED TO BE TREATED AS B USINESS ITA NO.1 61 / AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 0 9 - 10 P AGE 2 OF 3 INCOME AND EXPENSE CLAIMED IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ARE REQUESTED TO BE ALLOWED AS REVENUE EXPENSES. 2. BRIEFLY STATED , THE RELEVANT MATERIAL FACTS ARE LIKE THIS. THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE ACT , BY ESTIM ATING INCOME AT RS.2,00,000/ - , AS THE ASSESSEE DID NO T CITE A NY DETAILS OF INCOME. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) BUT THAT ONLY INC R EASED THE T A X BU R DEN. LEARNED CIT(A) ENHANCED THE INCOME TO R.3,31,772/ - AS HE FOUND THAT THE RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.4,73,960/ - WERE IN THE NATURE OF REN T RECEIPTS. DISCARDING THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH SHOWED LOSS OF RS.36,710/ - , THE LEARNED CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO ADOPT RS.3,31,772/ - , AFTER PROVIDING F OR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 24(1), A S INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE HEAR D THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 4. WE FIND THAT ONE OF THE CONDITIONS SINE QUA NON FOR TAXABILITY OF AN INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY IS THAT ASSESSEE SHOULD BE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY FROM WHICH SUCH AN INCOME IS DERIVED. THAT CONDITION IS CLEARLY NO T SATISFIED IN THE PRESENT CASE AS ADMITTEDLY THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESS E E DOES NOT SHOW OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND OR BUILDING FROM WHICH RENTAL INCOME IS EARNED. HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO A FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT HAVE ANY OPPORTUNITY TO EXAMI NE T HE FACTS AS NO DOCUMENTS WERE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM. IT IS ALSO NOT CLEAR A S TO WHO W A S THE OWNER OF THIS PROPERTY AND, IF ASSESSEE WAS NOT THE OWNER, WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF RIGHTS T HAT HE HAD IN THIS PROPERTY SO AS ITA NO.1 61 / AHD/201 3 ASSESSMENT Y EAR: 20 0 9 - 10 P AGE 3 OF 3 TO ENTITLE HIM TO EARN THIS RENTAL IN COME. IN VIEW OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE C A SE, WE DEEM IT FIT A ND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATION DE NOVO AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE, IN ACCORD ANCE WITH THE LAW AND BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER. THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE THE LIBERTY , A S INDEED THE DUTY, TO PLACE ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE MATTER STANDS RESTORED TO THE FIL E OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 8 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016 . SD/ - SD/ - KUL BHARAT PRAMOD KUMAR (J UDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED: THE 8 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2016 . COPIES TO : (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGIST RAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD