Skip to main content

Income from property acquired for letting out is "income from business"

In Mack Soft Tech Pvt.Ltd., Hyd vs Dcit Hyderabad, the appeal was filed by the assessed against the order of the CIT (A)-4, Hyderabad dated 30.01.2015 confirming the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA r.w.s. 144C of the I.T. Act, wherein the AO has assessed income derived by the assessee from the business of operation and maintenance of information Technology Park as "Income from house property".

The assessed argued that the company was allotted/sold land by the APIIC to be used only for the specific purpose of setting up IT facility i.e., IT software, IT enabled service and IT infrastructure and that the assessee has developed an integrated business facility thereon called "Q-city" which has been exploited as a commercial asset in the business carried on by it and accordingly, the learned C.I.T(Appeals) ought to have held that the income derived by the assessee from the IT park is assessable as income from business.

The Appellant Tribunal referring to the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in  CIT vs. Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd and Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd, the Hon'ble Tribunal held that the main business of the assessee is to create the infrastructure and let out the same to earn income therefrom. Therefore, the decisions in the above cases before the Hon'ble Supreme Court are clearly applicable and directed the AO to treat the income from letting out and operation of ITA No 445 of 2015 Mack Soft Tech P Ltd Hyderabad the property as "income from business" and allow the expenditure and other claims in accordance with the law.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more

Person Being Prosecuted To Be Provided With All Relevant Documents

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Poonam Jain vs Union of India & Ors, noted that a person being prosecuted against has a right to be provided with all the material relied upon by the prosecuting agency to prosecute her/ him. In the instant case, a search was conducted at the residences of the petitioners and their statements were recorded and several documents were seized. They were issued show cause notices under Section 276 C(1) and Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, Section 181 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 50 and 51 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act. They sought to be provided with a copy of their statements and the documents seised. However, the same was denied to them.
Post a Comment
Read more