2012 (2) TMI 616 - HC - Income Tax

Whether the Tribunal was justified in ignoring the decision of the apex Court in the case of Shambu Investments (P) Ltd Vs. CIT 2003 (1) TMI 99 - SUPREME COURT wherein it was held that where the main intention is letting out property or any portion thereof the same may be considered as rental income or income from house property. Held that - Both in the case of earlier Assessment Years as well as in subsequent Assessment Years i.e. AY 1998-99 and 2000-01, such income had been assessed as business income. Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee states that it is only in the case of AYs 1997-98, 2001-02 and 2005-06 that the Revenue sought to take a different position. Of these three years, the appeals relating to the first two years AY 1997-98, 2001-02 have been dismissed and the matter has attained finality. In that view of the matter, the view which has been taken by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. The order of the Tribunal dated 29 August 2008 for AY 1997-98 and 2001-02 in fact did take note of the decision in the case of Shambhu Investments. SUPRA

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding the Tribunal's justification in ignoring a previous apex Court decision.
2. Assessment of income as business income versus rental income or income from house property for different assessment years.

Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961

The appeal in this case was brought by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, questioning whether the Tribunal was justified in disregarding a prior apex Court decision in the case of Shambu Investments (P) Ltd Vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 143. The key question was whether income from letting out property should be considered as rental income or income from house property. The Tribunal's decision was based on the finality and consistency of previous orders, noting that the issue had already been settled in earlier assessment years. The Tribunal's stance was supported by the fact that the Revenue had taken a different position only for certain specific assessment years, while consistently treating the income as business income in other years. Ultimately, the Tribunal's decision was upheld, and no substantial question of law was found to arise, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 2: Assessment of income as business income vs. rental income or income from house property for different assessment years

The Tribunal's decision in this case also revolved around the assessment of income as business income versus rental income or income from house property for various assessment years. It was highlighted that for the assessment years 1997-98 and 2001-02, the income had been consistently assessed as business income, and appeals related to these years had already been dismissed, thus attaining finality. The Tribunal's order for the assessment years 1997-98 and 2001-02 had taken into account the decision in the case of Shambhu Investments, further supporting the position that the income should be treated as business income. The Tribunal's decision for the assessment year 2005-06 was in line with the previous assessments and the finality of earlier orders, leading to the dismissal of the appeal without any substantial question of law arising.

This judgment from the Bombay High Court provides a detailed analysis of the interpretation of the Income Tax Act, 1961, specifically focusing on the treatment of income from letting out property and the distinction between rental income, income from house property, and business income. The decision underscores the importance of consistency in assessments across different years and the significance of previous rulings in shaping current judgments.