Tribunal directs reassessment of income from house property, remands issues back to Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) order regarding the assessment of income from a house property, directing the AO to pass a speaking order after considering the facts of the subsequent year. The appellant's challenge to the order dated 29.02.2016 of the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi, was upheld, emphasizing the need for a reassessment based on previous years' assessments. The issues of correctness of the CIT(A) order, assessment of income from house property, and valuation of the property for business purposes were remanded back to the AO for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues:
1. Correctness of order dated 29.02.2016 of the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi pertaining to 2011-12.
2. Assessment of income from house property at Rs. 16,89,734.
3. Valuation of house property and utilization of space for business purposes.

Issue 1 - Correctness of CIT(A) Order:
The assessee challenged the order dated 29.02.2016 of the CIT(A)-30, New Delhi, where the income was assessed at Rs. 16,89,734 against Nil income declared by the appellant. The Ld.AR argued that the AO in previous years had accepted fair rental value as Rs. 13,11,048. The issue was to be reconsidered by the AO based on previous years' assessments. The CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the AO. The Tribunal set aside the order and directed the AO to pass a speaking order after considering the facts of the preceding year.

Issue 2 - Assessment of Income from House Property:
The AO assessed the income from house property at Rs. 16,89,734 for an office space owned by the appellant. The appellant claimed that the space was used for business purposes and should not be assessable under 'house property.' The AO found that the appellant did not carry out any business activities at the property and concluded that the fair rental value was Rs. 34,02,400. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating that no rent agreement was in place with the tenant and no business activity was conducted by the appellant. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the AO to pass a speaking order after considering the facts of the subsequent year.

Issue 3 - Valuation of House Property and Business Utilization:
The appellant argued that only 1/3rd of the property was leased out, and the remaining 2/3rd was used for business purposes. However, the AO found that the entire premises were used by the tenant, as no rent was paid by the tenant apart from electricity and other payments. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating that no business activity was carried out by the appellant. The Tribunal directed the AO to pass a speaking order after considering the facts of the preceding year.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes and set aside the CIT(A) order, remanding the issues back to the AO for reconsideration based on the facts of the subsequent year.

---