9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . During the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO asked the assessee to explain as to why the rental income should not be assessed under the head „income from house property‟. In response, the assessee submitted that it has been consistently showing this rental income under the head business income since last many years. The explanation of the assessee was not accepted by the AO and he assessed this rental income under the head „income from house property‟. Being aggrieved, the assessee contested the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), it was submitted that the assessee has derived this income by way of exploiting its business asset and therefore the income derived from such exercise should be assessed under the head „income from business‟. The assessee made detailed submissions in support of his arguments but the ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied with the submissions of the assessee and relying upon the judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd v. CIT, 263 ITR 143 (SC) rejected the claim of the assessee by upholding the action of the AO in assessing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue consistently in many years, then, suddenly in a particular year it should not change its view or stand as it may cause avoidable hardship to the tax payer. In view of these facts, we find it appropriate to send this issue back to the file of the AO to examine this aspect properly. If this income has been assessed under the head „income from business‟ in all the past years, then, Revenue should not change the head of income unless the AO is able to bring out on record some material pointing out change in facts or law. For this purpose, the AO is obliged under the law to give a detailed reasoning in the assessment order in case he is not accepting the claim of the assessee. In the absence of the same, the AO is not permitted to change the head of income and should accept the claim of the assessee. The assessee is permitted to submit requisite details and documentary evidences, as may be required by the AO, or as may be considered appropriate by it, as per law and facts. The AO shall give adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee before deciding this issue afresh. With these observations, this issue is sent back to the file of the AO. Thus, ground nos. 1 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from any business of industrial undertaking" (80IA/ 80IB) and, therefore, their applicability would also be totally different. Emphasis be given on the words "in profits and gains derived from any business of an industrial undertaking" as distinguished from "any profit and gains derived from an industrial undertaking." At this point we pause and find out what is the import of the words "any business" used in the statute. The word "any" as appearing in Black's law dictionary is "some one out of many". There can be various aspects arising out of a business operation and as stated above, the appellant is authorized to invest and deal with money of the company not immediately required for achieving the main objects and interest from fixed deposit with the bank is a part of business operations authorized by MOA as objects incidental or ancillary to attainment of the main objects. It is clearly seen that the legislature consciously wanted to give a different interpretation of section 80IA/ 80IB as distinguished from that connected with section 80HH and similar other sections and there is no ambiguity about this." The ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied with the submissions of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e have also gone through the judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India 317 ITR 218 (SC). We find that this issue is squarely covered against the assessee with the judgement of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India (supra) wherein it has been held by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court that for granting benefit of deduction u/s. 80IB only the profit and gains which are derived from the industrial undertaking would be eligible to be considered. The ld. Counsel of the assessee was not able to show that the receipts on account of interest and rental income were in any manner derived from the industrial undertaking. Thus, respectfully following aforesaid judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, this issue is decided against the assessee and therefore these grounds are dismissed. 12. Ground no. 13 is for challenging the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C. This ground is consequential and therefore dismissed. 13. Ground no. 14 is general and does not require any specific adjudication. 14. As a result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 4849/Mum/2010 for A.Y 2007-08 15. It is noted that the grounds rai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these expenses are to be allowed under the head income from house property as the expenses were incurred in connection with the rented property. The AO further held that the litigation expenses were not incurred for the purpose of business. As per the provisions of section 37(1) of the Act, the litigation fees can be allowed as deduction only if it is incurred to protect the business. It was further held that in the assessee‟s case, the assessee has incurred the expenses to stop the owner from developing the rented property, which was not at all business expenditure. Accordingly, the AO disallowed professional fees of Rs. 15,75,215/- claimed by the assessee. 19. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein it was submitted by it that the assessee has paid a sum of Rs. 15,75,215/- to solicitors namely M/s Kanga & Company for protecting tenancy right of the assessee in the office premises at ground floor of the building which has been let out to it by M/s Bharat Insulation Company Limited. The genuineness of expenditure has not been disputed by the A.O., nor any expenditure was attributed as personal in nature. It is also not the case of the A.O. th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
