2015 (8) TMI 1466 - AT - Income Tax

Correct head of income - rental income from Operating Family Entertainment Center cum Mall and Maintenance Charges - Income from House Property OR Profit and Gains from Business or Profession - Held that - As decided in assessee s own case 2014 (7) TMI 1171 - ITAT MUMBAI giving space with services and facilities of varied and wide nature would definitely constitute a business and the relationship between the parties in such case is distinguished from that merely of a landlord and tenant relationship. We therefore find no infirmity in the impugned orders of the CIT(A) treating the operational income received by the assessee companies from running of Malls in the form of rent and service charges as their business income and upholding the same on this issue we dismiss these appeals filed by the Revenue. - decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Classification of rental income and maintenance charges as income from house property or business income.
2. Treatment of income from commercial complex as income from business.
3. Consideration of legal precedent regarding income derived from letting out furnished premises.
4. Evaluation of services and amenities provided in determining income classification.

Issue 1:
The appeal concerned the classification of rental income and maintenance charges as either income from house property or business income for the assessment year 2010-11. The Appellate Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer (AO) treated the income earned by the assessee from letting out the property as income from house property, while the assessee considered it as income from business. The AO specifically categorized the income from commercial complex, parking income, and advertisement and sponsorship income as part of the business income. However, the Tribunal upheld the First Appellate Authority's decision to treat the income from the commercial complex as business income and interest income as income from other sources.

Issue 2:
The second issue revolved around whether the income from the commercial complex should be treated as income from business. The Tribunal referred to previous orders in the assessee's case for assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10, where the CIT(A) had consistently classified the income from the commercial complex as business income. The Tribunal emphasized that the primary intention of the assessee was to exploit the property through complex commercial activities, leading to the rental income being considered business income. The Tribunal cited legal precedents and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the department's appeal.

Issue 3:
A key aspect of the judgment involved the consideration of a decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. The Tribunal highlighted that the income derived by letting out furnished premises with various services was assessable as income from property and not business income. This legal precedent was crucial in determining the classification of income in the present case.

Issue 4:
The final issue addressed the services and amenities provided by the assessee, such as security systems, cleaning, maintenance, lighting, and parking management. The Tribunal noted that these services constituted regular amenities and facilities for occupants, including tenants. Despite the provision of these services, the Tribunal affirmed the classification of income from the commercial complex as business income based on the complex commercial activities undertaken by the assessee.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the classification of income from the commercial complex as business income, following legal precedents and previous orders in the assessee's case. The department's appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal's decision was pronounced on 7th August 2015.