9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (7) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that for the asst. yr. 1978-79 the ITO had similarly allowed deduction of Rs. 21,082. According to the ld. Commissioner the assessee owned a building at Calcutta consisting of 18 office units. For each annual rent of Rs. 37,116 was being received. The building had three floors which are used by the tenants for the purpose of carrying out the business activities. The assessee used to provide stair case lightings and lift facilities. The amount received from the tenants were divided into two parts first part related to rent and the second part as service charges. The total service charges for the asst. yrs. 1977-78 and 1978-79 worked out to Rs. 6,676 and 6,444 respectively against the rental income of Rs. 37,166 for asst. yr. 1977-78 and Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ss. 22 to 27 of the Act. The ld. Commissioner set aside the assessments and directed the ITO to make fresh assessment in accordance with law. 3. Being aggrieved the assessee has come up in appeal before us. It was contended by Shri Sarda that the approach of the ld. Commissioner to direct the ITO to treat the receipts from service charges as part of rental receipts and thereby treating the same as part of the income chargeable under the head income from house property was not correct. He stated that the assessee company owner the said building which was also utilised for carrying out his own business activities, i.e. some portion of the said property which was situated at 9 Rabindra Sarani, Calcutta. Now in respect of the portion utili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... property therefore was chargeable u/s 22 of the Act and the corresponding deductions as were permissible u/s 24 to 27 only could be allowed in computing the said income from house property. The decision of the ITO therefore, to allow deduction in regard to the service charges against income from business was clearly erroneous as held by the ld. Commissioner. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. In our view a simple issue has been made complicated by an erroneous approach to the facts of the case. The facts as are placed before us which are not in dispute show firstly that the assessee owns a building at Calcutta. Secondly it carries on its own business activity in certain part of the building. Thirdly about 18 units are let out t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew therefore, the decision of the ITO cannot be said to be erroneous when he accepted the claim of the assessee. But for the recovery of the service charges from the other to the entire expenses incurred towards service charges amounting to Rs. 26,245 for asst. yr. 1977-78 and Rs. 27,526 for asst. yr. 1978-79. As pointed out earlier these charges have been in fact reduced by the recoveries made from other tenants with the result that the expenditure which have been allowable to the assessee is correspondingly reduced. We therefore, see no infirmity in the conclusion reached by the ITO as a consequence his order(s) cannot be said to be prejudicial to the interest of revenue. In the above view of the matter we hold that the orders as made by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
