9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) dated 03.09.2024 for the A.Y.2018-19 arising out of order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'Act') dated 11.05.2021. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is engaged in the business of letting out buildings both residential and non-residential which has filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 admitting total income of Rs. 70,36,870/- on 29.09.2018. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and accordingly statutory notices under section 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee through ITBA module. The Assessing Officer observed that assessee has entered into a lease agreement with three parties to rent out portions as follows: - S. No. Name of Tenant Are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee made similar submissions and also relied on the decision of the ITAT in assessee's own case for the earlier assessment year i.e., A.Y. 2015-16. However, Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Dr. K.M. Mehaboob [TS-618-HC-2016 (KER)] dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before us by raising following grounds of appeal : - "1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ative [hereinafter in short "Ld.DR"] submitted that the reliance placed by the Ld.AR in assessee's own case for the A.Y. 2015-16, it was observed that the revenue has not brought any case contrary to the decision of the ITAT cited by the Ld.AR nor any material submitted by the Ld. DR reversing the decision of the ITAT Kolkata Bench on the same issue. The Ld. DR submitted that subsequently, Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of CIT v. Dr. K.M. Mehaboob (supra) has held that the provisions of section 23(1) of the Act regarding estimation of rent for the purpose of let-out has been held in favour of the revenue. Ld. DR placed heavy reliance on the above case and pleaded that order of the Assessing Officer be sustained. 9. We have heard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers themselves are the Directors of the lessee company and hence related. However, in the instant case, the lease has been done to the third non-related parties based on commercial consideration. The portion let out to M/s. A.S. Raja Trust which is a non-profit organisation is meagre and incidental to the hospital activities of M/s. Visakha Hospitals & Diagnostics Limited. It was explained that M/s. A.S. Raja Trust operates a blood bank as a non-profit organisation which is incidental to the hospital run by M/s. Visakha Hospitals & Diagnostics Limited which occupies major portion of the let-out area. Further, as submitted by the Ld.DR the decision of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment year is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Andhra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
