2016 (12) TMI 547 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of claim of loss - Held that - The assessee did not raise any specific submissions on this issue and even have not pointed out any material from the Paper Book as to how the assessee would be entitled for claim of deduction on account of loss so claimed. In the absence of any specific submission and production of sufficient material, we are not inclined to interfere with the orders of authorities below. This issue is, therefore, decided against the assessee Claim of assessee under section 24(a) disallowed - Held that - . We, after going through the orders of authorities below did not find any whisper in the impugned orders if Assessing Officer has supplied copy of information under section 133(6) of the Act to the assessee before passing any adverse orders against the assessee. Therefore, any material collected at the back of the assessee and not confronted to the assessee ad without calling for comments of the assessee would not be admissible in evidence against the assessee. The assessee, therefore, rightly relied upon decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishan Chand Chela Ram (1980 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME Court ). There is no other material brought on record against assessee for disallowing claim under section 24(a) of the Act. Considering the above discussion, we are of the view that authorities below were wholly unjustified in denying deduction under section 24(a) of the Act in favour of the assessee. The rental income is clearly assessable as income from house property in the case of the assessee. Therefore, assessee would be entitled for deduction under section 24(a)

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of claim of loss under 'Business or Profession'.
2. Disallowance of deduction under section 24(a) of the Income Tax Act.
3. Allowance of interest expenses and payment to Estate Officer under section 24(b) of the Income Tax Act.

Issue No. 1: Disallowance of Claim of Loss under 'Business or Profession'

The assessee challenged the disallowance of a claim of loss of ?81,538 under the head 'Business or Profession'. The assessee had shown only rental income in the Income and Expenditure account, indicating no business activities were carried out during the year. The Assessing Officer disallowed the loss, concluding that the assessee was not engaged in any business activity. The CIT (Appeals) confirmed this disallowance as the assessee did not make any submissions on this issue. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the authorities' decisions due to the absence of specific submissions or sufficient material from the assessee. Consequently, the ground was dismissed.

Issue No. 2: Disallowance of Deduction under Section 24(a) of the Income Tax Act

The assessee contested the disallowance of a deduction of ?57,10,796 under section 24(a) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had leased land and building to a company that demolished the old structure and constructed a new hotel building. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction, reasoning that the assessee was not the owner of the new construction. The CIT (Appeals) upheld this view, stating that the rent should be assessed as 'income from other sources' and not 'Income from House Property'.

The Tribunal, however, found that the property was let out as land and building, and the lease deed stipulated that the lessee must hand over the land and building along with any construction upon lease termination. The Tribunal noted that the principle of consistency applies, and the assessee had been allowed this deduction in earlier years. The Tribunal held that the rental income should be assessed as 'Income from House Property', entitling the assessee to the statutory deduction under section 24(a). The orders of the authorities below were set aside, and the Assessing Officer was directed to allow the deduction of ?57,10,796.

Issue No. 3: Allowance of Interest Expenses and Payment to Estate Officer under Section 24(b) of the Income Tax Act

The assessee challenged the CIT (Appeals)'s decision to set aside the issue of allowance of interest expenses of ?58,91,669 and payment of ?40,37,979 to the Estate Officer. The CIT (Appeals) had restored the matter to the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee to prove that the expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for earning the lease money. The Tribunal noted that this issue was covered in favor of the assessee by an earlier order of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench for the assessment year 2009-10, which allowed the deduction. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the authorities below and directed the Assessing Officer to follow the earlier Tribunal order and pass a consequential order accordingly.

Conclusion:

The appeal was partly allowed. The disallowance of the claim of loss under 'Business or Profession' was upheld, the disallowance of the deduction under section 24(a) was overturned, and the issue of interest expenses and payment to the Estate Officer was remanded for reconsideration in line with the Tribunal's earlier decision.

← Previous Next →