M/s.Habitat Venture Constructions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore V. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Bangalore

ITA 1704/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9223 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRIA JT
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC - A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1704/BANG/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S. HABITAT VENTURE CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., 2210, 4 TH CROSS, 1 ST MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANGAR, 2 ND STAGE, BENGALURU 560 040. PAN: AABCH 5395R VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.K. JHA, JT. CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 27.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.12.2016 O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) INTER ALIA ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E-TAX APPEALS, PASSED UNDER SECTION 250 OF THE ACT IN SO FAR AS IT IS AGAINST THE APPELLANT IS OPPOSED TO LAW, EQUITY, WE IGHT OF EVIDENCE, PROBABILITIES AND THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES IN THE APPELLANT'S CASE. ITA NO.1704/BANG/2016 PAGE 2 OF 3 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN TAKING A NEW VIEW ON THE ACTIVITY OF SUB-LEASE TO BE AS BUSINESS ACTIVITY, W HICH WAS NEITHER ENUMERATED FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AO NOR THI S WAS PART OF THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT . 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO CONSIDER AND APPRE CIATE THE FACTS THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENGAGED IN REAL-ESTATE BUSINESS AND INCORRECTLY HELD THAT THE APPELLANT WAS IN THE BUSI NESS OF LEASING, WHICH LED TO INAPPROPRIATE DIS-ALLOWANCE OF EXPENSE S U/S 40(A)(IA) FOR NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDE R OF THE AO IN DIS-ALLOWING AND ADDING BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, A SUM OF RS. 30,00,000, THE EXPENSES CLAI MED TOWARDS SUBLEASE INCOME BY INCORRECT APPLICATION OF 40 (A) (IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT UNDER THE COMPUTATION PROVISION OF I NCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, DELET E OR SUBSTITUTE ANY OF THE GROUNDS URGED ABOVE. IN THE VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL, THE APPELLAN T PRAYS THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AN D EQUITY. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 27.12.2016 , BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR, WE HAVE NO OPTIO N, BUT TO HEAR THE APPEAL EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, REVENUE WAS HEARD. 3. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE CIT( APPEALS) ON THE IMPUGNED GROUNDS AND WE FIND THAT HE HAS RIGHTLY AD JUDICATED THE ISSUES IN DETAIL AND I FIND NO INFIRMITY THEREIN. ACCORDINGL Y, I CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS). ITA NO.1704/BANG/2016 PAGE 3 OF 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2016. SD/- (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 27 TH DECEMBER, 2016. /D S/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.