9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 1015X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AMIT SHUKLA, J.M. The present appeal preferred by the assessee, is directed against the impugned order dated 27th April 2011, passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) V, Mumbai, for the quantum of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) for assessment year 2007 08, on the following grounds: 1. On the fact and circumstances of the case as well as in Law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in treating the Business Centre(I.T Park) Income as Income From House Property instead of Business Income without considering the facts circumstances of the case. 2. On the fact and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he immediately preceding year i.e., A.Y. 2005 06 and has decided the issue against the assessee. The said order has been reversed by the Tribunal in assessee s own case cited supra. The issue raised in ground no.1, has been dealt with and discussed vide Para 13 of the order dated 12th August 2011 (supra), passed by the Tribunal in assessee s own case, which reads as follows: 13. The undisputed fact is that the property in question is an I.T. Park, with all infrastructure facilities and services. This is not a simple building. The Ministry of Commerce and Industries, notifies certain building as I.T. Park only if various facilities and infrastructure, as specified by the Department, are provided. It is an undisputed fact that all the tec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... remains that it is the assessee who ultimately bears such expenditure for the services and undertakes to provide such services. The facilities are made available by the assessee to the person occupying the premises. Coming to the case laws in Saptarshi Services Ltd. (supra), the Hon ble Gujarat High Court held that the income earned from business centre is to be assessed under the head Income From Business Profession . The Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue against this judgment was rejected by the Hon'ble Supreme Court which is reported as 264 ITR (St.) 36. Coming to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in Harvindarpal Mehta (supra), the Tribunal, in this decision, after considering the judgment in Shambhu Inves ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Property . Consequent to our decision in ground no.1, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow both the expenditure claimed as well as the claim for deduction under section 80IA(4)(iii). Consequently, we set aside the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and allow the ground no.2 and 3 raised by the assessee. 7. Following the aforesaid findings of the Tribunal, we allow the grounds no.2 and 3, raised by the assessee. 8. Similarly, ground no.4, is also consequential to ground no.1, which has been decided by the Tribunal in Para 16, vide order dated 12th August 2011, which reads as follows: 16. Now it is well settled that notional interest on deposits cannot be taken into consideration for determining the annual letting valu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
