TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED
1. Whether notional annual letting value (deemed rent) can be assessed under the head "Income from House Property" in respect of unsold flats held as stock-in-trade for the assessment year in question.
2. Whether profit element on conversion/capitalization of shops (previously stock-in-trade) into capital asset can be added to total income as a quasi-business profit in the absence of statutory provision applicable to the assessment year.
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS - Issue 1: Deemed Rent on Unsold Flats Held as Stock-in-Trade
Legal framework: Section 23 (and specifically later-introduced section 23(5) w.e.f. 01.04.2018) deals with computation of annual value for income from house property; municipal ratable value (MRV) is an accepted basis for determining annual value where applicable. General principle: taxation of income depends on its true character and statutory provisions in force for the relevant assessment year; prospective application of legislative amendments is the norm.
Precedent treatment: The Tribunal considered and applied a line of authorities distinguishing (a) decisions treating notional rent as assessable under Income from House Property and (b) coordinate-bench decisions holding that unsold flats shown as stock-in-trade should not be taxed on notional letting value but as business income on sale. The Tribunal followed the ratio of the jurisdictional High Court decisions holding rental receipts from unsold constructed portion can be income from house property and the principle in Tip Top Typography that ad hoc percentage estimates are impermissible; it also applied recent coordinate-bench guidance in Inorbit directing computation by reference to MRV and laying down exceptions/riders.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal observed that the issue is not res integra and that prior rulings require that (i) where notional rent is to be computed, MRV should be used rather than an ad hoc percentage of investment; (ii) certain exceptions prevent levy of notional rent - e.g., where advances have been received and possession not delivered (treated as sale), or where units are work-in-progress; and (iii) statutory amendment in Sec. 23(5) (w.e.f. 01.04.2018) supports the view that unsold flats held as stock-in-trade should not be subjected to deemed annual value for the limited period post-completion, and that amendment is prospective. Applying these principles, the Tribunal found the Assessing Officer's flat 8% (or fixed percentage) computation unsustainable and directed recomputation on the basis of MRV while noting the exceptions identified by coordinate bench precedents.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - the Assessing Officer cannot make an ad hoc computation of deemed rent at a fixed percentage of investment; deemed rent, if any, must be computed with reference to MRV and subject to the identified exceptions (advances/possession; work-in-progress). Obiter - remarks on Sec. 23(5) being supportive though prospectively applicable serve as persuasive contextual observations rather than operative grounds for the present assessment year.
Conclusions: The addition on account of deemed rent is set aside for statistical purposes and remitted to the Assessing Officer to recompute annual value on the basis of Municipal Ratable Value, taking into account the riders: (a) no notional rent where advances received with no possession/delivery (tantamount to sale), (b) no notional rent where unit is work-in-progress, and (c) MRV to be used rather than a fixed percentage estimate.
ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS - Issue 2: Conversion of Stock-in-Trade into Capital Asset and Profit Element on Capitalization of Shops
Legal framework: Income under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" and provisions dealing with transfer/conversion of stock-in-trade into capital asset are relevant; section 28(via) (inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2019) specifically addresses treatment on conversion but is not retrospective. General principle: additions as protective assessments require justification, and taxability depends on the law applicable to the relevant assessment year.
Precedent treatment: The Tribunal referred to the temporal scope of statutory amendments and to coordinate jurisprudence which treats conversion of stock-in-trade into capital assets as requiring statutory backing to tax any deemed profit at the time of conversion when the provision is not in force for the relevant year.
Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal noted that the assessee had capitalized shops and treated them as capital assets in books; there was no rejection of books of account or evidence of contravention of law to warrant a protective addition. Section 28(via) which could have authorized a charge at conversion was inserted later and is not applicable to the assessment year under consideration. Thus, absent contemporaneous statutory provision or record-based justification to disregard the accounting treatment, the AO's estimate of a 10% profit element was not in accordance with law.
Ratio vs. Obiter: Ratio - where a statutory provision addressing conversion into capital asset is not in force for the relevant assessment year, the Assessing Officer cannot make an addition by estimating a notional profit element on conversion in the absence of evidence rejecting the books or showing impropriety; such addition must be deleted. Obiter - reference to the policy rationale of section 28(via) as a later protective measure is explanatory.
Conclusions: The addition of Rs. 4,07,686/- (10% profit element on capitalization) is deleted. Ground challenging the conversion-based addition is allowed because section 28(via) does not apply to the assessment year and there is no record warranting rejection of the assessee's accounting treatment.
CROSS-REFERENCES
1. Issue 1 and Issue 2 are interrelated by concern over characterization of unsold/retained immovable properties (stock-in-trade vs capital asset) and the permissible methods and timing for taxing notional values; the Tribunal's approach emphasizes application of law in force for the relevant year and use of objective valuation norms (MRV) where deemed rent is to be computed.
2. The prospective operation of legislative amendments (Sec. 23(5) and Sec. 28(via)) is determinative: Sec. 23(5) supports the view against taxing notional rent for certain periods post-completion but is prospective; Sec. 28(via) would have addressed conversion-tax consequences but is not applicable to the year under appeal.
TaxTMI 
