2017 (7) TMI 1101 - AT - Income Tax

Rental income of assessee to be assessed as income from other source OR house property - mistake apparent in the order passed by the Tribunal - Held that - Since there was no decision of the Tribunal in the A.Y. 1995-96 for treatment of income of assessee as income from other sources , however, while deciding the appeal for the A.Y.1997-98 to 2000-01, the Tribunal has just followed the decision of the Tribunal in the A.Y. 1995-96 for treating the rental income as income from other sources. However, in the order passed by the Tribunal in the A.Y.1995-96, nowhere income from house property was treated as income from other sources , but on the other hand Tribunal have dismissed assessee s plea for treating the rental income as income from business. There is an apparent mistake in the order passed by the Tribunal 2016 (6) TMI 1289 - ITAT MUMBAI following the order of the Tribunal in A.Y. 1997-98 to 2000-01 for holding that income should be assessed as income from other sources . Accordingly, we recall the order and direct the Registry to refix the same for passing order denovo

Summary

Issues:
1. Mistake apparent in the Tribunal's order regarding the taxation of income from house property under the real income theory.
2. Typographical errors in the Tribunal's order and the need for a recall and amendment.
3. Non-decision on the disallowance of repair and maintenance expenses, depreciation of building, administrative and service charges, and Municipal Tax by the Tribunal.
4. Discrepancy in the Tribunal's decision on the treatment of rental income as 'income from other sources' instead of 'income from house property'.
5. Request for the order to be recalled and amended based on the arguments presented.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appellant argued that there was a mistake apparent in the Tribunal's order as there was no real income to the assessee, questioning the taxation of income from house property based on the real income theory. It was also highlighted that the Tribunal decision cited was not related to the assessee's case but to a sister concern's case.

2. The appellant pointed out typographical errors in the order and requested a recall and amendment. The Revenue also argued for a recall based on mistakes in recording contentions and the incorrect treatment of rental income in previous Tribunal decisions.

3. The issue of non-decision on various expenses like repair and maintenance, depreciation, administrative charges, and Municipal Tax by the Tribunal was raised, seeking a resolution through the recall and amendment of the order.

4. The Tribunal's decision to treat rental income as 'income from other sources' instead of 'income from house property' was contested. The Tribunal's reliance on previous decisions for this treatment was questioned, highlighting the lack of independent findings in the case of the appellant.

5. In light of the arguments presented, the Tribunal acknowledged the mistakes in the order and decided to recall it for a fresh decision after considering all relevant contentions, previous Tribunal decisions, and judicial pronouncements. The recall and amendment were allowed based on the issues raised by both the assessee and the revenue.

This detailed analysis covers the various issues raised in the legal judgment, providing a comprehensive overview of the arguments presented and the Tribunal's decision to recall and amend the order for a fresh determination.