2018 (8) TMI 1753 - AT - Income Tax

Assessing the income received from rent, compensation and service charges - income from house property OR income from business and profession - admission of additional evidence - Held that - In the impugned assessment year also in course of hearing before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) the assessee had submitted similar additional evidences for consideration of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and to impress upon the fact that by virtue of these additional evidences holding the assessee as a monthly tenant, the decision of the Tribunal in earlier assessment years cannot be followed. It is apparent on record, Commissioner (Appeals) has totally ignored such evidences filed by the assessee. Therefore, keeping in view the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for assessment year 2008 09 and 2009 10 as referred to above, we restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after due opportunity of being heard to the assessee - Assessee s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
- Dispute over assessing income from rent, compensation, and service charges as income from house property or business and profession.

Analysis:
1. Issue of Income Classification: The appeal was filed challenging the assessment of income received from rent, compensation, and service charges as income from house property instead of business and profession. The Assessing Officer treated the income as income from house property based on previous decisions and added back an amount after deductions. The assessee contested this, citing evidence to show they were not the owner but a monthly tenant. The City Civil Court's order supported this claim. The Tribunal acknowledged past decisions against the assessee but, in a similar case for 2008-09 and 2009-10, considered additional evidence and sent the issue back for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal, in this case, also restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation after considering all evidence, including court orders and high court decisions.

2. Judicial Consistency: The Tribunal noted the recurring dispute over the classification of income from subletting premises. Despite past decisions against the assessee, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of considering additional evidence for maintaining judicial consistency. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to thoroughly review all evidence, including court orders and high court decisions, to make a fair determination. The Tribunal's decision aimed to ensure a comprehensive assessment of the issue in light of all available evidence and legal precedents.

3. Restoration for Fresh Adjudication: The Tribunal's decision to restore the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication was based on the failure of the Commissioner (Appeals) to consider the additional evidence presented by the assessee. By allowing the appeal for statistical purposes, the Tribunal emphasized the need for a thorough review of all evidence and legal aspects before making a final determination. The Tribunal's ruling highlighted the importance of due process and fair consideration of all relevant factors in resolving the dispute over the classification of income from rent, compensation, and service charges.