https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450751 ITAT Ahmedabad set aside CIT's revision order under section 263 regarding classification of rental income. The assessee, engaged in IT services, earned rental income from property held as non-current investment. CIT contended AO failed to inquire why rental income shouldn't be classified as business income. ITAT held that since assessee wasn't in real estate business and rental income was reflected as non-operational income in financial statements, classification as house property income was correct. Court distinguished that rental income qualifies as business income only when letting property is part of regular business activities, not when earned from investments by companies engaged in other businesses. en-us Fri, 08 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Mar 2024 08:56:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450751 ITAT Ahmedabad set aside CIT's revision order under section 263 regarding classification of rental income. The assessee, engaged in IT services, earned rental income from property held as non-current investment. CIT contended AO failed to inquire why rental income shouldn't be classified as business income. ITAT held that since assessee wasn't in real estate business and rental income was reflected as non-operational income in financial statements, classification as house property income was correct. Court distinguished that rental income qualifies as business income only when letting property is part of regular business activities, not when earned from investments by companies engaged in other businesses. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 08 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450751