9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1161X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able - HELD THAT:- We do not find any force in the above argument of the learned Counsel for the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the assessee was giving loan against mortgage of the property and such interest income received towards loan extended against mortgage of properties cannot partake the character of rental income. We find the learned CIT (A) while upholding the addition has also given a finding that since the assessee has already offered the rental income under the head income from house property as per remand report, the addition should be limited to the disallowance u/s 24(b) of the Act only which in our opinion is just and proper and needs no interference. Accordingly, ground of appeal No.3 by the assessee is dismissed. - ITA No.157/Hyd/2022 - - - Dated:- 27-3-2023 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member And Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Rama Rao, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Rajendra Kumar, CIT(DR) ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, A.M This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.02.2022 of the learned CIT (A)11 Hyderabad relating to A.Y.2009-10. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the past years and accordingly treated the amount of Rs.9,28,856/- as income from other sources which has also been confirmed by the CIT (A). Aggrieved with such order, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides. We find identical issue had come up before the Tribunal in assessee s own case in the preceding A.Ys. We find the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 151 to 153/Hyd/2022, order dated 8.7.2022 while deciding the identical issue has granted partial relief to the assessee wherein the benefit of agricultural income of Rs.25,000/- for the A.Y 2003-04, Rs30,000/- for the A.Y 2004-05 and Rs.35,000/- for the A.Y 2005-06 were granted by observing as under: 9. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT (A) and the Paper Book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case made addition of Rs.81,485/- treating the same as income from other sources as against agricultural income declared by the assessee. Similar additions have been made for the A.Y 2004-0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accordingly partly allowed. 9. So far as the ground of appeal No.3 is concerned, the same relates to the order of learned CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 10,24,470/-. The facts in brief are that the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings, noted that the assessee has shown substantial cash received as rental income. On being confronted by the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted details of rent received, account confirmation copies and copies of rental agreement. The Assessing Officer issued summon u/s 131 to some of the persons for his examination. He noted that Shri Mohd.Asif Ali Khan in his statement submitted that he had borrowed a sum of Rs.4.5 lacs by pledging the property with the assessee @ 4% per month. To cover up the interest, a rent agreement was made and interest in the guise of rent was paid by him in cash. The assessee could not produce Shri Lakshmi Gopal, Bharadwaj and Smt. Sheela Lajwanti from whom rent was shown to have been received. It was found by the Assessing Officer that no such person was available at the address given by the assessee. He therefore, recorded the statement of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2003-04 174300 0 174300 2004-05 226785 8400 218385 2005-06 343090 60000 283090 2006-07 657996 277000 380996 2007-08 1750600 1563500 187100 2008-09 1892717 1700700 192017 2009-10 3110730 3414900 0 Total 70,24,500 19,20,173 The Assessing Officer has considered the sum of Rs.19,20,173/- as rental income whereas the sum of Rs. 70,24,500/- which is in cash. It is seen that the modus operandi of the appellant is that it gives loan to various entities and in turn takes the document of their properties. The appellant effectively is accounting for the int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest on the loan advanced, the same cannot be treated as rental income and the CIT (A) was fully justified in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 14. We have heard the rival arguments made by both sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT (A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case made addition of Rs.34,14,900/- by treating the same as income from other sources as against rental income shown by the assessee on the ground that the assessee could not prove the existence of the persons against whom he has shown the cash receipt as rental income as those persons were not in existence and were not traceable. It is the case of the Assessing Officer that the assessee had given certain amount of loan against mortgage of property and such interest income has to be treated as income from other sources and not rental income. We find the learned CIT (A) sustained the addition the reasons of which are already reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the assessee that since the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
