9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssion on behalf of the Revenue proceeds on an incorrect fundamental premise viz. that the Addl. Rent Control Tribunal had fixed a rent of ₹ 1.42 lakhs per month in respect of (L40) premises, occupied by M/s. Bank of Punjab. This is factually incorrect. The amount of ₹ 1.42 lakhs per month were directed to be paid by M/s. Bank of Punjab in eviction proceedings as mesne profits/ damages. All the other premises are let out to persons who are protected by the Rent Control Act. Moreover, no order has been passed by the Rent Control Tribunal, fixing higher rent in respect of the other premises nor has the Revenue brought on record any evidence of the other premises being let out by the Respondent at more than the declared rent. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s an owner of numerous shops in one building at New Delhi. The Respondent had let out all its shops to persons who are tenants protected under the Delhi Rent Control Act. In respect of one of its shops/ premises viz. L40 which was given on rent to one M/s. Hemkunt Chemicals (a protected tenant), who had illegally sublet it to M/s. Bank of Punjab. Therefore, proceedings were initiated by the Respondent for eviction of M/s. Bank of Punjab Ltd., as a trespasser and M/s. Hemkunt Chemicals for unlawfully inducting M/s. Bank of Punjab Ltd., into the premises. In these eviction proceedings the Rent Control Tribunal by order dated 5th July, 2003 directed M/s. Bank of Punjab to deposit ₹ 1,42,000/per month in Court. This order was confirmed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nts. Thus, enhancement made by the Assessing Officer was deleted. 6. On appeal by the Revenue, the impugned order of the Tribunal held that the Respondent is expressly barred from receiving any consideration in excess of the provisions of the Rent Act. Further, the impugned order of the Tribunal while upholding the order of the CIT(A) held that the determination of the mesne profit/ occupation charges/ damages by the Rent Control Tribunal was only with regard to one specific premises (L40) which the original tenant one M/s. Hemkunt Chemicals had unlawfully inducted one M/s. Bank of Punjab Ltd., so as to trespass into it. The Tribunal further held that in view of the fact that all the other shops/ premises of which the rent was sought to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
