9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning rent therefrom. Clearly it is not so in this case. Further, Ms. Khan the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee invites our attention to the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Sane & Doshi Enterprises (2015 (4) TMI 882 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) wherein on identical facts this Court has taken a view that rental income received from unsold portion of the property constructed by real estate developer is assessable to tax as income from house property. Disallowance under Section 80IB on common expenses relatable to Poiser Project and Saki Naka Project - Held that:- This issue stands concluded against the revenue and in favour of the assessee by virtue of the orders of this Court in respect of assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owance under Section 80IB on common expenses relatable to Poiser Project and Saki Naka Project, which were debited to Sakinaka Project with clear cut intention to suppress the profit of Sakinaka Project, which is fully taxable thereby increasing the profit of Poiser Project?" 3. Regarding Question no.(i):- (a) The respondentassessee is engaged in the business of developing real estate projects. During the previous year relevant to the subject assessment year this respondent has claimed a sum of ₹ 30.18 lakhs under the head income from house property. The same was not accepted by the Assessing Officer who held it to be business income in Assessment Order dated 30th December, 2010 under Section 143(3) of the Act. Consequently the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and Rayala Corporation (supra), the Supreme Court on facts found that the appellant was in the business of letting out its property on lease and earning rent therefrom. Clearly it is not so in this case. Further, Ms. Khan the learned counsel appearing for the respondentassessee invites our attention to the decision of this Court in CIT v/s. Sane & Doshi Enterprises (2015) 377 ITR 165 wherein on identical facts this Court has taken a view that rental income received from unsold portion of the property constructed by real estate developer is assessable to tax as income from house property. (f) In view of the above, the question as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. 4. Regarding Question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e competent authority. Prima facie, it appears that the issue stands concluded in favour of the respondentassessee. (c) However, it would be appropriate to admit this appeal on the question no.(ii) and to list it along with Income Tax Appeal nos.1513 of 2012 and 2253 of 2011 filed by the revenue in respect of the same respondentassessee for final disposal. This is so as the issue seems to be covered by the decision of this Court and Purvankar Projects Limited. 6. The appeal admitted on the substantial question of law at question no.(ii). 7. Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Tribunal. This would enable the Tribunal to keep the papers and proceedings relating to the present appeal available, to be produced wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
