9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3-14 2015-16. ITA NO.4173/Mum/2019 2. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order dated 22.04.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the assessment year 2013-14. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: - The order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 is bad in law. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has erred in dismissing the appeal and confirming the addition of ₹ 12,22,683/- (net) as notional deemed income from house property in respect of unsold units lying vacant, held as stock-in-trade( Inventory). 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has erred in continuing the addition. following the ratio of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd. without appreciating the fact that SLP has been granted by the Hon ble Supreme Court against the decision. 4 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has failed to appreciate that amendment to Income Tax Act to Section 23(5) to tax Notional Deemed House Property Income oil units. Inventory is prospective and therefo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed by the Ld. Representative of the assessee, therefore, this issue is being decided in favour of the revenue against the assessee being not pressed. ISSUE NOs. 2 to 6 6. All the issues are in connection with the confirmation of the addition of ₹ 12,22,683/- as notional deemed income from house property in respect of unsold units lying vacant held as stock-in-trade. At the very outset, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that these issues have duly been covered by the decision of the Hon ble ITAT in case of M/s. Saranga Estate Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(4), Mumbai ITAT in ITA. No.4420/Mum/2017. The copy order is on the file. The relevant finding has been given in para no. 7 which is reproduced as under.:- 7. We have heard the rival submissions. The Ld. AR at the outset placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 296 ITR 661 (Guj) which had held that where the property was held as stock in trade of the assessee, then the said property would partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from business and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Construction Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT in ITA No.4418/Mum/2017 for A.Y.2012-13 dated 30/11/2018 wherein it has been held as under:- 7. We have heard the authorized representatives of both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record. We find that our indulgence has been sought by the assessee by preferring the present appeal, for adjudicating as to whether the CIT(A) is right in law and facts of the case in concluding that the deemed notional lettable value of the completed unsold flats held by the assessee company as stock-in-trade was liable to be determined and brought to tax under the head Income from house property . We find from a perusal of Sec. 22 of the Act that the annual value of any property consisting of any building or land appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner, other than such portions of such property as he may occupy for the purposes of any business or profession carried on by him the profits of which are chargeable to income tax, shall be chargeable to income tax under the head Income from house property . Further, the determination of the annual value of the property is envisaged in Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ness stocks, which may include movable and immovable, would be taken to be stock-in-trade , and any income derived from such stocks cannot be termed as income from property . Even otherwise, it is to be seen that there was distinction between the income from business and income from property on one side, and 'any income from other sources'. The Tribunal, in our considered opinion, was absolutely unjustified in comparing the rental income with the dividend income on the shares or interest income on the deposits. Even otherwise, this question was not raised before the subordinate Tribunals and, all of sudden, the Tribunal started applying the analogy. 9. Admittedly, the lower authorities had relied on the judgement of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) and had therein concluded that the notional lettable value of the unsold flats held by the assessee was liable to be determined and brought to tax under the head Income from house property . We find that the issue under consideration before us i.e whether the notional lettable value of the property held by an asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w taken by the Tribunal in the case of M/s Runwal Constructions Vs. ACIT in [ITA No. 5408 5409/Mum/2016; dated 22.02.2018], and after deliberating on the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in CIT Vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj) and that of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in Ansal Housing Finance Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 186 (Del), has held that the assessing officer was not correct in bringing to tax the notional annual lettable value of the unsold flats which were held by the assessee as stock-in-trade. On a similar footing a similar view had also been taken by the ITAT, Mumbai Bench G , Mumbai in the case of Progressive Homes, Mumbai Vs. ACIT-Circle 4(4), Mumbai [ITA No. 5082/Mum/2016; dated 16.05.2018) ITA No.4 and ITAT H Bench, Mumbai in Haware Engineers Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Central Circle-4(2), Mumbai [ITA No. 7155/Mum/2016; dated 10.10.2018]. 10. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, respectfully following the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Neha Builders (P) Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj) and the aforesaid orders of the coordinate benches of the Tribunal, we are of the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
