MAYURI BUILDERS, MUMBAI v. JCIT 22(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1922/MUM/2014 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 192219914 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AAGFM7123C
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1922/MUM/2014
Duration Of Justice 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
Appellant MAYURI BUILDERS, MUMBAI
Respondent JCIT 22(1), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 08-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 13-07-2017
Next Hearing Date 13-07-2017
First Hearing Date 13-07-2017
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 20-03-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1922/MUM/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) M/S. MAYURI BUILDERS VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF C 3RD FLOOR CHITRAKUT BLDG. R.B. MEHTA ROAD GHATKOPER (E) MUMBAI 400077 INCOME TAX 22(1) MUMBAI PAN AAGFM7123C APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUMAN KUMAR DATE OF HEARING: 08.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08.11.2017 O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 253 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-33 MUM BAI DATED 02.01.2014 FOR A.Y. 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL: - 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) [HER EINAFTER REFERRED TO AS LD. CIT(A)] ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OF TREATING RENTAL INCOME DISCLOS ED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY OF RS 4 07 227/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND TAXED ACCORDINGLY WITHOUT AP PRECIATING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN DISAL LOWING INTEREST PAID OF RS.2 69 540/- AND TAXED ACCORDINGLY. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE F IRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDER FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR ON 30.09.2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 1 86 32 943/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 25.10.2011 UNDER SECTIO N 143(3). THE AO ITA NO.1922/MUM/2014 M/S. MAYURI BUILDERS 2 WHILE PASSING ORDER BESIDES THE OTHER ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCES TREATED THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AS INCOME FROM OT HER SOURCES AND FURTHER DISALLOWED INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF ` 2 69 540/-. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ACTION OF THE AO WAS CONFIRMED. THUS FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRES ENT APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE GIV ING SUFFICIENT TIME. THE ASSESSEE IS HABITUAL IN NOT APPEARING ON THE DATE OF HEARING. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED PAPER BOOK ON 13.09.2017 AND THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED FOR 07.11.2017. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF O F THE ASSESSEE ON 07.11.2017 HENCE THE CASE WAS AGAIN ADJOURNED FOR 08.11.2017. TODAY NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APP LICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED BEFORE US. WE HAVE LEFT WITH NO OPTION BUT TO HEAR THE LEARNED D.R. AND DECIDE THE CASE ON THE BASIS O F MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR REVENUE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS SHOWN RENTAL INCOME FOR ALLOWING MOBILE TOWER ON TH E TERRACE AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RENTED OUT ANY PART OF THE BUI LDING AND THE INCOME EARNED FROM SUCH SERVICE IS NOT INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND THE SAME WAS TREATED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT W AS ARGUED THAT SIMILAR DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE FOR A.Y. 2008-09. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN A LOAN TO ITS SISTER CONCERN AND THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT CHARGED ANY INTEREST ON THE LOAN ADVANCED TO THE SAID PARTY. THE ASSESSE E HAS PAID INTEREST ON ` 2 69 540/- AGAINST THE LOAN AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE . 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED D .R. FOR REVENUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE HA VE SEEN THAT SIMILAR INCOME EARNED FROM MOBILE TOWERS WAS TREATED AS INC OME FROM OTHER SOURCES FOR A.Y. 2008-09. THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER CAME FORWARD NOR FILED ANY MATERIAL OR WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TO SUBSTANTIAT E HIS CONTENTION TO CONVINCE US TO TREAT THE INCOME RECEIVED ON INSTALL ATION OF MOBILE TOWER ON TERRACE IS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. HENCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY ILLEGALITY OR INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTH ORITIES. FURTHER FOR ITA NO.1922/MUM/2014 M/S. MAYURI BUILDERS 3 DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID BY THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER SUBSTANTIATED NOR FILED ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY. HENCE THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF I NTEREST IS ALSO CONFIRMED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08 TH NOVEMBER 2017. SD/ - SD/ - (G.S. PANNU) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED: 8 TH NOVEMBER 2017 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -33 MUMBAI 4. THE CIT -22 MUMBAI 5. THE DR B BENCH ITAT MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI N.P.