9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 1016 - AT - Income TaxRental Income - Income from business or Income from house property - nature of income - Held that - In the present case, the assessee has acquired the land on lease basis in various places i.e. Mumbai, Kolkata, Bangalore, Chennai and constructed commercial complexes and leased out the same to the commercial entrepreneurs such as Standard Chartered Bank, Bata India Limited, EDS Electronic Data Systems India (P) Ltd. and Spencers for a higher rental amount. The intention of the assessee is very clear from the date on which it is existed is to carry out the business activity such as to construct the godowns or residential or commercial buildings or commercial shops, etc. the lands owned by firm or by taking land on long lease from others is the activity of the assessee. In our opinion, the judgement of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. 2015 (5) TMI 46 - SUPREME COURT squarely applies to the facts of the case and we hold that the income earned by the assessee is Income from business and not Income from house property . - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues Involved:
1. Classification of rental income as "Income from house property" vs. "Income from business." 2. Applicability of precedents and judicial interpretations regarding the nature of income. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Classification of Rental Income The primary issue revolves around whether the rental income received by the assessee firm should be classified as "Income from house property" or "Income from business." The assessee firm, engaged in receiving rental income and trading tobacco, declared a total income of Rs. 22,74,280/-. The firm reported tobacco sales of Rs. 3,40,24,250/- and rental income of Rs. 3,27,98,587/- from properties leased to various commercial entities such as Standard Chartered Bank, Bata India Limited, EDS Electronic Data Systems India (P) Limited, and Food World Super Market (Spencer) Limited. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) concluded that the rental income should be taxed under "Income from house property" based on the nature of the business as stated in the partnership deed and the 3CD report. The A.O. argued that the firm constructed buildings on leased lands and derived rental income, thereby acting as the property owner. The assessee firm, however, contended that its primary objective was to conduct business by acquiring properties, constructing buildings, and leasing them out commercially, thus the income should be classified as "Income from business." Issue 2: Applicability of Precedents and Judicial Interpretations The A.O. relied on judicial precedents, including the cases of East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. Vs. CIT and Sultan Brothers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT, to support the classification of rental income as "Income from house property." However, the assessee firm cited the Supreme Court's decision in M/s. Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd., which emphasized that if the main objective of a firm is to earn income from letting out properties, such income should be treated as "Income from business." The CIT(A) sided with the assessee, referencing previous assessments (2003-04 to 2007-08) where the income was classified as business income. The revenue appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the ITAT had previously ruled the income as "Income from house property" for earlier assessment years (2003-04 to 2005-06). Tribunal's Judgment After reviewing the materials and arguments, the Tribunal found that the assessee firm undertook systematic business activities, including acquiring land on lease, constructing commercial buildings, and leasing them out. The Tribunal noted that the firm's intention, as per the partnership deed, was to carry out business activities involving the construction and leasing of properties. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Chennai Properties, which held that income from letting out properties, when it is the main business objective, should be classified as "Income from business." The Tribunal also considered the jurisdictional High Court's decision in CIT Vs. S. Premalatha, which supported the view that constructing buildings on leased land for business purposes does not change the character of the income to "Income from house property." Conclusion The Tribunal concluded that the income earned by the assessee from leasing properties should be classified as "Income from business" and not "Income from house property." Consequently, the appeals filed by the revenue for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 were dismissed. The above order was pronounced in the open court on 19th Feb'16.
|
