ITO, New Delhi v. M/s. Logistician Search Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4428/DEL/2010 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 442820114 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACL7297H
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4428/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. Logistician Search Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-02-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 28-02-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 28-02-2011
Next Hearing Date 28-02-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 04-10-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH D : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4428/DEL./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08) ITO WARD 4 (4) VS. M/S. LOGISTICIAN SEARCH PVT. LTD. NEW DELHI. P 65 3 RD FLOOR SOUTH EXTN. PART 2 NEW DELHI. (PAN : AAACL7297H) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SMT. SRUJANI MOHANTY SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS)-VII NEW DELHI DATED 28.7.2010. THE GRO UNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER :- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IS ERRON EOUS & CONTRARY TO FACTS & LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING T HE A.O. TO TREAT INCOME OF RS.9 00 000/- AS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AS AGAINST BUSINESS INCOME TREATED BY THE A.O. AND THE ASSESSEE IN ITS I.T. RETURN. 2.1 THE LD. CIT (A) IGNORED THE FACT THAT THE ASSES SEE DID NOT FILE REVISED RETURN TO CLAIM THE DEDUCTION U/S 23 O F THE I.T. ACT 1961. ITA NO.4428/DEL./2010 2 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO ALTER OR A MEND ANY GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF H EARING. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FI LED RETURN IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON 30.10.2007 WHICH WAS PRO CESSED AND THEREAFTER SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT. DURING THE YEAR THE ONLY INCOME DERIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS RENTAL INCOME OF RS.9 LACS ON THE L EASEHOLD PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 4 MUNIRKA MARG NEW DELHI. THIS PROPERTY WAS P URCHASED AND REGISTERED DURING THE YEAR. IN THE RETURN THE ASSESSEE HAS S HOWN AS BUSINESS INCOME. HOWEVER HE CLAIMED THE SAME AS INCOME FROM HOUSE P ROPERTY DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO SUBMITTED A REVISED COMPUTATION OF INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ENTERTAIN THE CLAIM B Y FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZ (INDIA) LIMITED 284 ITR 323. THE CIT (A) GRANTED THE RELIEF BY HOLDING THAT NEIT HER THE NATURE OF PROPERTY BEING STOCK-IN-TRADE NOR THE NATURE OF RENTAL INCOM E EARNED FROM THE PROPERTY BEING INCIDENTAL TO THE ASSESSEES MAIN BUSINESS IS RELEVANT TO DECIDE THE HEAD UNDER WHICH THE RENTAL INCOME IS ASSESSABLE TO TAX. ONCE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS THE OWNER OF THE SAID PROPERTY AND THE RENTAL INCOME IS EARNED BY HIM IN HIS CAPACITY AS OWNER THE SAME IS TO BE ASSESSED TO TAX UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 3. NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVE R THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT CIT (A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE ON MERITS. SIMILARLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE ON MERITS AS IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER THAT HE HAS DIS ALLOWED THE CLAIM BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE (INDIA) LIMITED CITED SUPRA. HE SUBMITTED THAT T HE CIT (A) HAS ALSO NOT CONSIDERED THE ISSUE ON MERITS AND SIMPLY FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN DE CIDED THAT WHEN THE ITA NO.4428/DEL./2010 3 ASSESSEE IS A OWNER OF THE PROPERTY THEN THE RENTAL INCOME RECEIVED FROM THE SAID PROPERTY IN HIS CAPACITY AS OWNER THE SAME IS TO BE TAXED UNDER THE SPECIFIC HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND SHE VE HEMENTLY PLEADED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE ON MERITS ABOUT THE HEAD OF THE INCOME. 4. AFTER HEARING THE REVENUE AND CONSIDERING THE RE CORDS WE FIND THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY IT SHALL BE PRO PER THAT THE ISSUE IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS AFTER PROVIDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD T O THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED T O DECIDE THE ISSUE AS PER LAW. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (C.L. SETHI) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 28 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A)-VII NEW DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT) NEW DELHI. AR ITAT NEW DELHI.