9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... properties. In the prior Assessment Years, the AO had accepted the assessee s treatment of such income as an income from house property, which is one of the factors which has weighed with the Tribunal to allow the Appeals filed by the assessee, on the principle of consistency. We are of the opinion that such principles are appropriately applied by the Tribunal. The Supreme Court has held it to be a settled principle of law that although strictly speaking res judicata does not apply to income tax proceedings, and as such, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year. Thus, when a fundamental aspect permeating through different assessment years has been treated in one way or the other and that has been allowed to continue such position ought not be changed without any new fact requiring such a direction. (See - M/s. Radhasoami Satsang, Saomi Bagh, Agra [ 1991 (11) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] - No substantial question of law. - G. S. KULKARNI SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. Sushma Nagaraj, a/w Singhi, Advocates. For the Respondent : Mr. Fenil Bhatt, a/w Sameer Dalal, Advocates. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : G.S. KULKARNI, J.) 1. These three Appeals under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... axmann.com 193 (SC) held that in the present case, Section 22 of the Act was clearly applicable as the property in question was owned by the Assessee. The Tribunal also observed that the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Shambhu Investment (P.) Ltd. [2001] 116 Taxman 795 (Calcutta) confirmed the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Shambhu Investment P. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax [2003] 263 ITR 143 (SC), wherein the High Court had taken a view that when the assessee was the owner of certain premises, then the income derived from such property would be income from house property. The Tribunal also considered other relevant decisions to come to a conclusion that the Appeal filed by the assessee must be allowed. 6. In the above circumstances the Revenue is before this Court raising the following substantial questions of law:- A. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was right in treating the rental income derived from the premises owned by the Assessee in MBC Tower, Chennai as income assessable under the head Income from House Property , without appreciating the fact that income earned from the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e context of Section 22 read with Section 24 of the Act, the provisions would permit a distinction in categorizing income under different heads, in the facts and circumstances in hand. It is her contention that such a position stands approved by the Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties Investment Ltd (supra). 9. On the other hand, Learned Counsel for the assessee would submit that Section 22 of the Act makes no distinction on the basis of the assessee s business and in fact it was appropriate in the facts of the present case for the assessee to treat the rental income from the MBC Tower property as an income from house property. It is submitted that there was nothing improper much less illegal for the benefit being conferred under Section 24 of the Act, to be availed by the assessee. It is submitted that in fact in the previous three Assessment Years i.e. in 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08, the Revenue had accepted that this very income be taken to be income from house property and without any material change in the circumstances, much less in law, the Revenue has taken a position contrary to what had prevailed in the earlier assessment years. Hence, it was not appropriate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of assessee s ownership and also to have income from properties which are not of assessee s ownership from which rental income is derived, would amount to reading something into Section 22, than what the provision actually ordains. The legislature does not carve out any such categorization/exception. Thus, we do not find that the Revenue is correct in its contention that, in the circumstances in hand, a straight jacket formula is required to be applied, namely, that Section 22 is unavailable to an assessee, who is in the business of letting out properties. 13. In the prior Assessment Years, the Assessing Officer had accepted the assessee s treatment of such income as an income from house property, which is one of the factors which has weighed with the Tribunal to allow the Appeals filed by the assessee, on the principle of consistency. We are of the opinion that such principles are appropriately applied by the Tribunal. The Supreme Court has held it to be a settled principle of law that although strictly speaking res judicata does not apply to income tax proceedings, and as such, what is decided in one year may not apply in the following year. Thus, when a fundamental aspect per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
