9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 875X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was having rental income and utility receipts which was declared as rental income and were accepted by AO and were assessed as income from house property. There is nothing on record that such utility receipts are not from the said tenants from whom the assessee derived rent. The ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decisions relied upon by the AO. The facts remaining the same over the past years as already mentioned herein above and there is no change and the doctrine of consistency has to be taken into consideration. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of insurance premium - CIT(A) allowed claim - Held that:- As per section 24(i)(ii) the amount of premium paid to insure the property against risk of damage or destruction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed herein above and therefore such an expenditure which has been consistently allowed by the department and there is no dispute to the fact that the doctrine of consistency is to be taken into consideration and the said expenditure is allowable in the impugned year as well. Accordingly we find no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A), who has rightly allowed the claim of assessee. - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 1692/Kol/2012 - - - Dated:- 29-4-2015 - Mahavir Singh, JM And B. P. Jain, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri P N Barnwal, JCIT For the Respondents : Shri Anil Kochar Shri S L Kochar, Adv. ORDER Per Shari B. P. Jain, AM. This appeal of the Revenue arises out of the order of ld.CIT(A)-VIII, Kolkata dated 13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not brought on record any evidence or any sound reason to change the head of the income as has been derived by the assessee in the earlier years where the assessee has regularly been treated as income assessable under the head house property as the same is fully and totally related to the house property and accordingly held that such incomes are to be assessed as income from house property as in the earlier years and allowed. 4. The ld. DR relied upon the order of AO whereas the ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the submissions made before ld. CIT(A) and the order of ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. The undisputed facts of the present case are that the assessee has receiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs. 2007-08 and 2008-09 the assessee was having rental income and utility receipts which was declared as rental income and were accepted by AO and were assessed as income from house property. There is nothing on record that such utility receipts are not from the said tenants from whom the assessee derived rent. The ld. CIT(A) has rightly distinguished the decisions relied upon by the AO. The facts remaining the same over the past years as already mentioned herein above and there is no change and the doctrine of consistency has to be taken into consideration. In the circumstances and facts of the case we find no infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A)in para 5.2.6. who has rightly deleted the disallowance made by AO. Thus ground no.1 of the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income from house property the expenditure is totally related to the establishment of business centre where from the assessee had derived income considerably in the subsequent years as well. 9. The ld. DR relied upon the order of AO whereas the ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the submissions made before ld. CIT(A) and the order of ld. CIT(A). 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. The undisputed facts in the present case are that the assessee had paid ₹ 13,93,080/- to Jones Lang Lassale Property Consultants (India) Pvt. Ltd. as management advisory payment. This is also not disputed. AO had observed in the order that the amount was spent for management advice regarding business centre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is doing business who are looking after all the activities of the business and there is a deduction against the business income and accordingly allowed the same. 12. The ld. DR relied upon the order of AO whereas the ld. Counsel for the assessee relied upon the submissions made before ld. CIT(A) and the order of ld. CIT(A). 13. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. The undisputed facts are that remunerations have been paid to two directors, the details of which are placed on record and the directors are whole time directors looking after the business of the assessee as well as for development work. The assessee as a result entered into an agreement for new business venture as observed herein a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
