2011 (8) TMI 1169 - AT - Income Tax

Assessment of income - business center income - income from house property or business income Held that - The property can be used only for a specific purpose i.e., I.T. operation and the assessee has provided complex service facilities and infrastructure for operating such business and on this factual matrix, we uphold the contention of the assessee that the income in question should be assessed under the head Income From Business & Profession . Claim for deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii) computation - Held that - Assessing Officer is directed to allow the claim of expenses as the disallowance was made only on the ground that the income is assessable under the head House Property . Consequent to our decision in ground no.1, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow both the expenditure claimed as well as the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii). Consequently, we set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and allow the ground no.2 and 3 raised by the assessee. As the income in question is assessable under the head Income From Business , the addition made under section 23(1)(a) is to be necessarily deleted

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of income as "Income From House Property" or "Income From Business or Profession"
2. Disallowance of expenses and deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii)
3. Determination of annual letting value under section 23(1)(a)

Issue 1: Classification of Income:
The case involved the classification of income earned from a property purchased by the assessee as either "Income From House Property" or "Income From Business or Profession." The property in question was an I.T. Park with various infrastructure facilities and services. The assessee provided complex services in the form of operation place in the I.T. Park, offering amenities like waiting room, conference room, valet parking, and more. The contention was whether the income should be treated as rental income or business income. The tribunal held that since the primary intention of the assessee was to exploit the property through complex commercial activities, the income should be considered as business income. The decision was supported by various case laws and the factual matrix of the case.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Expenses and Deduction:
The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of expenses and deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii) based on the classification of income as "Income From House Property." However, following the decision on Issue 1 that the income should be classified as business income, the tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow both the claimed expenses and the deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii). The order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) disallowing these claims was set aside.

Issue 3: Determination of Annual Letting Value:
Regarding the determination of annual letting value under section 23(1)(a), the Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the Assessing Officer's decision, considering notional interest on deposits. However, the tribunal referred to a Full Bench judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, stating that notional interest on deposits cannot be considered for determining the annual letting value. Additionally, since the income was classified as "Income From Business," the addition made under section 23(1)(a) was deemed unnecessary and was directed to be deleted.

In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and providing relief on all grounds raised by the assessee.

---