9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not rendered lettable. This is also in view of the fact that in its meeting on 15-7-2007, the Board of Directors of the assessee company resolved that attempt be made to let out the property as a bare-shell, without making any renovation or furnishing. This fact has been taken note of by the ld. CIT(A) at page 4, para (d) of the impugned order. For the above discussion, the grievance of the assessee is found to be justified and is accepted as such. The order of the ld. CIT(A) in this regard is cancelled and it is held that the income of the assessee is to be computed as ‘income from house property’. The assessee’s claim in this regard is, thus, allowed. Coming to the Department’s grievance, once we have held that the income is to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee company was formed with the object of acquiring immovable property to let it out. It purchased an immovable property out of unsecured loan taken from its holding company. It approached an Estate Agent for identifying the potential tenant. However, the property could be let out only in the subsequent year. The assessee claimed that during the year under consideration, no rent was receivable in respect of the said property. The annual value of the property was computed under the head Income from House Property in the return of income filed at Rs. Nil. The deduction of interest paid on the loan, u/s 24 of the Act, was claimed. Thus, a loss of ₹ 1,08,77,689/- was computed by the assessee under the head Income from House Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consisting of any building or land appurtenant thereto, of which, the assessee is the owner, shall be chargeable to tax under the head income from house property . In this regard, it is of little moment that the assessee owner is a company formed with the object of acquiring immovable property to be let out, as is the case herein. It has been held to this effect in East India Housing Land Development Trust Ltd. vs. CIT , 42 ITR 49 (SC) and in S.G. Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT , 83 ITR 700 (SC). Both these decisions were cited by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) has neither dealt with these decisions, nor quoted any decision to the contrary. In view of these decisions, the observation of the ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
