9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Allowability of deductions on account of salary paid to night guard, sweeper, and caretaker, and certain electricity charges from gross rent received in computing house property income. Analysis: The judgment revolves around the question of whether deductions for salary paid to night guard, sweeper, caretaker, and electricity charges are justified in computing house property income. The Department argued that these deductions are not allowable under sections 23 and 24 of the Income-tax Act. Reference was made to the case law of CIT v. Sreelekha Banerjee [1989] 179 ITR 46 (Cal) to support this contention. On the other hand, the assessee contended that if the rent is considered composite, with part being income from house property and part from other sources, then the restrictions on deductions for house property income may not apply to the income from other sources. The judgment emphasizes the importance of factual findings by the Tribunal. If the income is bifurcated between pure rent and income from other sources, deductions for caretaker, night guard, electricity, etc., may be claimed from the portion related to income from other sources. Case law such as CIT v. Kanak Investments (P.) Ltd. [1974] 95 ITR 419 (Cal) and Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 547 were cited to support this argument. The judgment highlights that the High Court should not interfere with the Tribunal's factual findings and should focus on determining questions of law based on those facts. The Tribunal's finding that the rent is composite, including services rendered by the assessee, indicates that the rent does not wholly arise from house property. Consequently, deductions claimed for income from other sources may be permissible, even if not allowed under sections 23 and 24 of the Income-tax Act. The judgment concludes that based on the Tribunal's findings, no question of law arises for reference, and the rule is discharged. All parties are directed to act on a signed copy of the order.
|
