2017 (11) TMI 1855 - AT - Income Tax

ITAT upholds rental income as 'Income from business' not 'Income from house property'

ITO 15 (3) (1) Mumbai Versus Third Eye Estates Pvt Ltd

The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to assess rental income under 'Income from business' instead of 'Income from ... Rent from owned property - income from house property OR Income from business - HELD THAT:- The main objects of the assessee not only includes acquisition and sale of flats, provision of convenience commonly provided in the flats, shops and residential and commercial premises but the assessee can also let out the property. Therefore, in view of the decision of Chennai Properties And Investment Ltd. vs. CIT [2015 (5) TMI 46 - SUPREME COURT] we are of the view that this issue is no more res integra. We, therefore, confirm the order of the CIT(A) treating the income as “Income from business” in respect of the rent received. No illegality or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of claim of expenses which has been incurred by the assessee for maintaining the business assets as the assessee is engaged in the business of renting various business activities such as house-keeping, security, telephone, electricity, maintenance etc. No cogent material or evidence was brought to our notice by the learned DR so that the finding given by the CIT(A) could be reversed. We, therefore, confirm the order of the CIT(A) on this account. - Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Issues:1. Assessment of rental income under the head 'Income from house property' instead of 'Income from business.'2. Deletion of disallowance of expenses incurred for maintaining business assets.Analysis:Issue 1: Assessment of Rental IncomeThe case involved an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A)-24, Mumbai, regarding the assessment year 2010-11. The Assessing Officer assessed the rental income of the assessee under the head 'Income from house property' despite the assessee being engaged in the business of purchase and sale of real estate. The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses claimed by the assessee, resulting in a nil assessment of business income. On appeal, the CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee, considering that the rental income should be assessed under the head 'Income from business' based on the main objects of the appellant company, which included letting out property and providing various facilities commonly found in flats, shops, and premises. The CIT(A) held that the rent received was a business receipt due to the nature of services rendered by the assessee, such as housekeeping, security, and maintenance, which were embedded in the rent receipts. The ITAT confirmed the CIT(A)'s order, citing the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a relevant case, and upheld the treatment of the income as 'Income from business.'Issue 2: Deletion of Disallowance of ExpensesThe second issue pertained to the deletion of the disallowance of expenses amounting to a significant sum incurred by the assessee for maintaining business assets. The CIT(A) had deleted this disallowance, emphasizing that the expenses were incurred during the normal course of business activity, including routine expenditures like salary, bonus, administrative expenses, depreciation, and interest. The ITAT found no illegality or infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order, as the assessee was engaged in renting various business activities and there was no evidence presented to reverse the CIT(A)'s findings. Consequently, the ITAT confirmed the order of the CIT(A) regarding the deletion of the disallowance of expenses.In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, affirming the CIT(A)'s decisions on both issues related to the assessment of rental income and the deletion of expenses. The judgment was pronounced on November 13, 2017, with detailed reasoning provided for each issue addressed during the proceedings.