ACIT - 5(3)(2), MUMBAI V. XTP DESIGN FURNITURE LTD., CHENNAI

ITA 717/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8030 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 01-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NISHANT SOMAIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH A THAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI RAVISH SOOD (JM) I.T.A. NO. 717 /MUM/20 1 7 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 12 - 13 ) ACIT 5(3)(2) ROOM NO. 573 AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. VS. M/S. XTP DESIGN F URNITURE LIMITED 37/38, VENTAKNARAYAN ROAD, ASV RAMAN TOWERS, T. NAGAR CHENNAI - 17 PAN : AAACX0160B ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI YOGESH A THAR & MS. RITU PUNJABI DEPARTMENT BY S HRI NISHANT SOMAIYA DATE OF HEARING 2 5 . 9 . 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25 . 9 . 201 8 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.10.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) - 10, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO A.Y. 2012 - 13. SOLITARY ISSUE URGED IN THIS AP PEAL IS WHETHER THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE AMOUNT RECEIVED TOWARDS PROVIDING AMENITIES BY THE ASSESSEE TO ITS TENANTS IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY , AS AGAINST ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSI NG THE SAME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED RENTAL INCOME AND ALSO INCOME FROM AMENITIES PROVIDED TO ITS TENANTS. THE ASSESSEE OFFERED RENTAL INCOME AS WELL AS IN COME FROM PROVIDING AMENITIES UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE INCOME FROM PROVIDING AMENITIES SHOULD BE ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ACCORDINGLY ASSESSED THE SAME UNDER TH E HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOTICED THAT AN IDENTICAL M/S. XTP DESIGN FURNITURE LIMITED 2 ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN A.Y. 2009 - 10 (ITA NO. 1106/MUM/2013 DATED 20.8.2014) AND ALSO IN A.Y. 2010 - 11 (ITA NO. 25/MUM/ 2014) AND IT WAS HELD THAT THE AMOUNT RECEIVED TOWARDS AMENITIES PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. ACCORDINGLY, THE LEARNED CIT(A) REVERSED THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HENCE THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED. 3. LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE AMENITIES PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE CONSISTED OF USE OF TERRACE AREA, CAR PARKING SPACE, PROVIDE A LIFTMAN, SECURITY SYSTEM, FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM AND ALSO TO MAINTAIN COMMON AREA FACILITIES. LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THESE AR E INTRINSICALLY CONNECT ED WITH RENTING OF PROPERTY. HENCE, THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN A.Y. 2009 - 10 HAS HELD THAT THE AMOUNT RECEIVED TOWARDS AMENITIES IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. IN A.Y. 2010 - 11, THE ASSESSEE H AS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION RENDERED BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SHAMBHU INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED (263 ITR 143) AND ALSO IN THE CASE OF SULTAN BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED (51 ITR 353) TO SUPPORT ITS VIEW. ACCORDINGLY, THE TRIBUNAL IN A.Y. 2010 - 11 ALSO HAS HELD THAT THE AMOUNT RECEIVED TOWARDS AMENITIES IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LEARNED DR TOOK SUPPORT OF THE DECISION RENDERED BY HON'BLE KOLKATA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MODEL M ANUFACTURING CO. PVT. LTD. (175 ITR 374) AND ALSO DECISION RENDERED BY HON'BLE P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GOWARDHAN DAS AND SONS (158 TAXMAN 465) AND CONTENDED THAT THE AMOUNT RECEIVED TOWARDS AMENITIES IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOU RCES. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE AS THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE COORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN A.Y. 2009 - 10 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. IN A.Y. 2010 - 11, THE TRIBUNAL HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION RENDERED BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. XTP DESIGN FURNITURE LIMITED 3 SHAMBHU INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. & SULTAN BROTHERS PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) TO SUPPORT ITS DECISION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE UPHOLD T HE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25 . 9 .201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - (RAVISH SOOD ) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 25 / 9 / 20 1 8 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI