REDWOOD IT SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI v. ITO 10(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1309/MUM/2018 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2020 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 130919914 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AADCR7296K
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1309/MUM/2018
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant REDWOOD IT SERVICES LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO 10(2)(2), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-02-2020
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 28-02-2020
Last Hearing Date 28-03-2019
First Hearing Date 28-03-2019
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 05-03-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH MUM BAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 ) REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. D-211 GHATKOPAR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE BEHIND R. CITY MALL OFF.L.B.S.MARG GHATKOPAR(W) MUMBAI-400 086 VS. ITO-10(2)(2) ROOM NO.455 4 TH FLOOR AAYKAR BHAWAN M.K.ROAD MUMBAI-400 020 PAN/GIR NO. A ADCR7296K ( AP PELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) REVENUE BY MS. JYOTI LAKSHMI NAYAK DR ASSESSEE BY SHRI RAKESH MOHAN AR DATE OF HEARING 05/12/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEME NT 28 /0 2 /2020 / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA (A.M) : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)22 MUMBAI DATED 08/11/2017 AND IT PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- GROUND NO. 1: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE AMOUNT OF RS 33 75 000/- RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT IN TERMS OF THE OPTION AG REEMENT IS A CAPITAL RECEIPT AND IS HENCE NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX. THE ABOVE LEGAL GROUND WAS NOT TAKEN BEFORE THE LD. CLT(A) AND IN VIEW OF ALL THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD THE SAME IS B EING RAISED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 2 GROUND NO.2: 2.1 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE. ON THE FACTS AN D IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A} HAVE ERR ED IN HOLDING THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 33 75 000/- RECEIVED AS PER THE OP LI ON AGREEMENT IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD 'INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY' VIS-A-VIS UNDER THE HEAD 'INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' AS CLAIM ED BY THE APPELLANT. 2.2 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THE OPTION AGREEMENT WAS NEITHER A RENTAL AGREEMENT NOR A LEASE AGREEMENT B UT AN AGREEMENT TO LEASE OUT PREMISES AT A FUTURE POINT OF LIME CONST RAINING THE APPELLANT TO LEASE OUT TO ANY THIRD PARTY AND CONSEQUENTLY THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD 'INCOME FROM OT HER SOURCES' TILL THE DATE THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY LEASED OUT CONSEQUEN T TO THE AGREEMENT. 2.3 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IT IS PRAYED THAT THE CONSIDERATION ON ACCOUNT OF THE OPT ION AGREEMENT BE DIRECTED TO BE TAXED UNDER HEAD 'INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' AND EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE AP PELLANT IN EARNING SUCH ALLOWED GROUND NO.3: WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE ANNUAL LETTABLE VALUE (ALV ) SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO MUNICIPAL VALUATION OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE THE A MOUNT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT PARTICULARLY IN THE FACTS OF THE APPELLA NTS CASE WHERE NEITHER THE PHYSICAL POSSESSION OF THE PROPERTY WAS GRANTED NOR THERE WERE ANY TAKERS OF THE PROPERTY ON LEASE DESPITE THE EFFORTS MADE BY THE APPELLANT 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E COMPANY HAD PURCHASED AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY FROM G-CORP PROPERTY PVT.LTD. AT LEVEL NO.4 IN G-CORP TECH PARK THANE. THE ASSESSE E HAS DIVIDED SAID PROPERTY INTO 4 UNITS. THE UNIT NO.3 & 4 HAS B EEN LET OUT TO M/S FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AS PER RENT AGREEMENT DATED 15/04/2010. THE UNIT NO.1 & 2 ARE VACANT BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS ENTERED INTO AN OPTION AGREEMENT WITH M/S FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.LT D. FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS WITH A COVENENT THAT THE PROPERTY SHALL NOT BE LET OUT TO A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE TENANT FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS FOR WHICH A COMPENSATION OF RS.33 75 000/- HAS BEEN FIXED AND SAID COMPENSATION HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 3 INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. DURING THE COURSE OF ASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE LD. AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS DECLARED LOSS OF RS.10 06 170/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE LD. AO FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN C OMPENSATION INCOME OF RS.33 75 000/- AND AS AGAINST WHICH IT H AS CLAIMED EXPENSES OF RS.43 81 170/- TO SHOWN NET LOSS OF RS. 10 06 170/-. THEREFORE HE CALLED UPON THE ASSESEE TO PRODUCE T HE DETAILS OF INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND ALSO DETAILS OF EXPE NSES ALONG WITH COPY OF AGREEMENTS/DOCUMENTS IF ANY ETC. IN RESPO NSE THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 26/12/2013 STATED THAT I T HAS RECEIVED COMPENSATION OF RS.33 75 000/- FROM M/S FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.LTD. IN PURSUANCE OF AN OPTION AGREEMENT AS PER WHICH T HE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN AN OPTION TO M/S FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.L TD. FOR LEASE OUT UNIT NO.1 & 2 AND SUCH OPTION HAS BEEN GIVEN FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS FOR WHICH A COMPENSATION OF RS.33 75 000/- HAS BEEN PAID. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE COMP ENSATION RECEIVED FROM M/S. FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.LTD. IS N EITHER FOR LET OUT OF PROPERTY NOR IN THE NATURE OF RENT AND HENCE THE S AME HAS BEEN CONSIDERED AS INCOME ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCO ME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE LD. AO WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE ARGU MENTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER TAKING NOTE OF NECESSARY FACTS INCLUDING OPTION AGREEMENT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT UNIT NO.1 & 2 WERE NOT LET OUT AND ACCORDINGLY APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 23(1)(B) OF THE I.T.ACT 1961 AND CONSIDERED AS DEEMED LET OUT AND ACCORDINGLY BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22 OF THE ACT D ETERMINED ALV OF THE PROPERTIES BY TAKING NOTE OF PREVAILING MARKET RENT AND ACCORDINGLY DETERMINED INCOME ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AT RS.76 64 328/- AFTER ALLOWI NG STANDARD DEDUCTION @30% ON TOTAL ALV OF THE PROPERTY. ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 4 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASS ESEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). BEFORE TH E LD.CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ELABORATE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ON THE ISSUE ALONG WITH VARIOUS EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNI SHED A COPY OF OPTION AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO WITH M/S FIRST DATA ( INDIA) PVT.LTD. TO GIVE AN OPTION TO THE PARTY TO LET OUT UNIT NO.1 AN D 2. THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN FORM OF OPTION A GREEMENT HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO THE LD. AO FOR HIS COMMENTS AND THE LD. AO VIDE HIS REMAND REPORT DATED 14/07/2017 HAS REJECTED AD DITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT SO CALLED OPTION AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE PARTIES WAS NEITHER R EGISTERED NOR PLACED BEFORE THE LD. AO AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN EV IDENCE. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT IN ABSENCE OF ANY FORMAL AGREEME NT REGARDING UNIT NO.1 AND 2 THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY HAS BEEN RIGHTLY COMPUTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22 & 23 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961. THE LD.CIT (A) AFTER CONSIDERING RELEVANT SUB MISSIONS OF THE ASSESEE AND ALSO TAKEN NOTE OF VARIOUS FACTS INCLU DING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3(1)(B) OF THE MAHARASHTRA RE NT CONTROL ACT 1999 OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE CONTEN TION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT COMPENSATION RECEIVED FROM M/S. FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.LTD. WAS NOT ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME F ROM HOUSE PROPERTY BECAUSE IT IS NEITHER IN THE NATURE OF RE NT AGREEMENT NOR THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN LET OUT. THE LD.CIT (A) FURT HER OBSERVED THAT THE SECOND CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IF AT AL L INCOME IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERT Y THEN THE ANNUAL LETOUT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE DETERM INED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MUNICIPAL RATEABLE VALUE BECAUSE I N ORDER TO ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 5 DETERMINE ALV OF THE PROPERTY BY APPLYING MUNICIPAL RATEABLE VALUE THE PROPERTY SHOULD BE OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW O F RENT CONTROL ACT. SINCE THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION COMES WITH IN THE A MBIT OF THE MAHARASHTRA RENT CONTROL ACT 1999 THE ANNUAL LETO UT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 22 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961 AS PER WHICH THE A NNUAL LET OUT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE THE VALUE WHICH THE PROP ERTY MIGHT FETCH IN THE MARKET. SINCE THE LD. AO HAS TAKEN MARKET VALU E OF THE PROPERTY ON THE BASIS OF UNIT NO.3 & 4 LET OUT BY THE ASSESS E TO M/S. FIRST DATA (INDIA) PVT.LTD. THERE IS NO REASON TO DEVIATE FRO M THE ANNUAL VALUE DETERMINED BY THE LD. AO AND ACCORDINGLY AFFIRMED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. AO AND REJECT GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE . 5. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE L D.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT COMPENSATION RECEIVED AS PER THE OPTION AGREEMENT IS CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY VIS-A-VIS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE F ACT THAT THE OPTION AGREEMENT WAS NEITHER A RENTAL AGREEMENT NO R A LEASE AGREEMENT BUT AN AGREEMENT TO LEASE OUT PREMISES A T A FUTURE POINT OF TIME RESTRAINING THE APPELLANT TO LEASE OUT THE PROPERTY TO ANY THIRD PARTY AND CONSEQUENTLY THE CONSIDERATION REC EIVED IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES TILL THE DATE THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY LEASED OUT. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN ORDER TO COMPUTE ALV OF THE PROPE RTY ON THE BASIS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22 OF THE ACT FIRSTLY TH E PROPERTY SHOULD BE LET OUT OR IT SHOULD BE DEEMED TO BE LET OUT. IN C ASE THE PROPERTY IS NOT LET OUT OR NOT VACANT THEN THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 22 CANNOT BE APPLIED TO COMPUTE ALV OF THE PROPERTY. IN THIS CAS E THERE IS A ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 6 COVENENT ON THE PROPERTY BY WAY AN OPTION AGREEMENT FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS AS PER WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS AGREED N OT TO LET OUT THE PROPERTY TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT GIVING AN O PTION TO THE PARTY FOR WHICH A COMPENSATION OF RS.33 75 000/- HAS BEEN PAID. THE SAID COMPENSATION WAS NEITHER IN THE NATURE OF RENT NOR WAS IT RECEIVED FOR LET OUT OF THE PROPERTY. THEREFORE THE SAME CA NNOT BE ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE LD. AO AS WELL AS THE LD.CIT (A) WITHOUT CONSIDERING THESE FACTS HAS SIMPLY ASSESSED INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 6. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND STRONGLY SUPPORTI NG ORDER OF THE LD.CIT (A) SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT AMOUNT IS TAXABLE UNDE R THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES BECAUSE THE AMOUNT RECEI VED FROM THE PARTY IS IN PURSUANCE ON AGREEMENT TO LET OUT THE P ROPERTY AND ACCORDINGLY THE ALV OF THE PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE CO MPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22 & 23 OF TH E I.T.ACT 1961. THE LD. AO AS WELL AS THE LD. CIT (A) HAS BROUGHT OUT CLEAR FACTS TO THE EFFECT THAT ALV OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE COMPUT ED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SECTION 22 OF THE ACT AND HENCE THERE IS NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT (A) . 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES PERUSED THE MATE RIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 22 & 23 OF THE ACT 1961 DEALS WITH COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. SECTION 22 OF THE AC T DEALS WITH TAXABILITY OF RENTAL INCOME FROM IMMOVABLE PROPERTI ES. THE COMPUTATION OF ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY HAS BEE N ENSHRINED IN SECTION 23 OF THE ACT. SECTION 22 OF THE ACT PROVI DES FOR THE ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 7 MECHANISM TO COMPUTE THE INCOME CHARGEABLE UNDER TH E HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. AS PER PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 23 THE ANNUAL VALUE OF ANY PROPERTY SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE SUM FOR WHICH THE PROPERTY MIGHT REASONABLY BE EXPECTED TO LET FROM YEAR TO YEAR OR WHERE THE PROPERTY OR ANY PART OF PROPERT Y IS LET AND THE ACTUALLY RENT RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE BY THE OWNER I N RESPECT THEREOF IS IN EXCESS OF THE SUM REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (A) O R WHERE THE PROPERTY IS LET AND WAS VACANT DURING THE YEAR OR ANY PART OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR AND OWING TO SUCH VACANCY THE ACTUA L RENT RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE BY THE OWNER IN RESPECT THEREOF IS LE SS THAN SUM REFERRED TO CLAUSE (A) THEN THE AMOUNT SO RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE IS CHARGABLE TO TAX. IF A PROPERTY IS LET OUT THEN TH E ACTUAL RENT RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE FROM THE PROPERTY IS DEEMED TO BE THE ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY. IF THE PROPERTY IS NOT LET OUT OR VAC ANT THROUGHOUT THE YEAR THEN THE SUM FOR WHICH THE PROPERTY MIGHT REA SONABLY BE EXPECT TO LET FROM YEAR TO YEAR SHOULD BE CONSIDERE D. WHAT IS REASONABLE RENT HAS NOT BEEN DEFINED. THEREFORE IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF REASONABLE RENT THEN THE P REVAILING MARKET RENT OR THE MUNICIPAL RATEABLE VALUE HAS TO BE CONS IDERED. 8. IN THIS LEGAL BACKGROUND IF YOU EXAMINE FACTS O F PRESENT CASE ONE HAS TO SEE WHETHER THE AO WAS RIGHT IN DETERMIN ING ALV OF THE PROPERTY IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2 3 WHEN THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION WAS LET OUT AND WAS UNDER A CO VENENT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. AS PER THE CLAIM OF T HE ASSESEE THE PROPERTY WAS NOT LET OUT BUT WAS UNDER COVENENT BY AN OPTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS PER WHICH THE ASS ESSEE HAS GIVEN AN OPTION TO THE EXISTING TENANT OF UNIT NO.3 & 4 TO TAKE ON RENT UNIT NO.1 AND 2 WITHIN A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS ON MUTU ALLY AGREED RATE ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 8 OF RENT. FURTHER AS PER THE SAID AGREEMENT OPTION WAS VALID FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS RECE IVED A COMPENSATION OF RS.33 75 000/-. IN THESE FACTS WE NEED TO EXAMINE WHETHER A PARTICULAR RECEIPT IS TAXABLE AS RENTAL INCOME ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERT Y OR COMPENSATION ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. AS WE NOTED IN EARLIER PART OF THIS PARAGR APH IF ANY INCOME IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROP ERTY IT SHOULD BE OUT OF PROPERTY LET OUT OR DEEMED TO BE LET OUT FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD. IN THIS CASE THE PROPERTY IS NEITHER LET O UT NOR VACANT. THEREFORE THE RECEIPT BY WAY OF AN OPTION AGREEMEN T CANNOT BE ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. FURTHER ONCE SAID RECEIPT IS NOT ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOM E FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND THEN OBVIOUSLY IT HAS TO BE CONSIDER ED UNDER ANY OTHER HEAD OF INCOME INCLUDING INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES . IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED COMPENSATION RECEIVED IN P URSUANCE OF OPTION AGREEMENT UNDER THE HEAD FROM OTHER SOURCES. AS WE NOTED IN EARLIER PARAGRAPH THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE AS SESSEE IS IN THE NATURE OF A COMPENSATION FOR NOT LETTING OUT PROPER TY TO ANY THIRD PARTY FOR A SPECIFIED PERIOD. THE MEANING THEREBY I S THAT BY ENTERING INTO AN OPTION AGREEMENT THE ASSESSEE HAD RENOUNCE D ITS RIGHT TO MARKET UNIT NO.1 AND 2 FOR A PERIOD OF 9 MONTHS FRO M THE DATE OF THE OPTION AGREEMENT AND BECAUSE OF COVENENT BY WAY O F AN OPTION AGREEMENT WITH THE PARTY AND HENCE ANY AMOUNT RECE IVED IN PURSUANCE OF SAID AGREEMENT IS IN THE NATURE OF COM PENSATION WHICH IS ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOUR CES AS RIGHTLY CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE WE ARE OF TH E CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LD. AO AS WELL AS THE LD.CIT (A) WAS INCORRECT IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE PROPERTY IS DEEME D TO BE LET OUT ITA NO.1309/MUM/2018 REDWOOD IT SERVICES P.LTD. 9 AND INCOME FROM SAID PROPERTY NEEDS TO BE COMPUTED U/S 22 OF THE I.T.ACT 1961. HENCE WE DIRECT THE LD. AO TO DELET E ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AS AGAINST THE INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SO URCES. 9. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 28/02/2 020 SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) SD/- (G. MANJUNATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 28/02/2020 THIRUMALESH SR.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (A) MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR ITAT MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//