<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (7) TMI 1226 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775158</link>
    <description>ITAT Visakhapatnam held that rental income from leased property should be classified as &quot;income from house property&quot; rather than &quot;income from business.&quot; The case involved an assessee who had discontinued business operations and leased premises to an educational society. The tribunal noted that no precise test exists for determining whether rental income falls under business income or house property, requiring case-by-case analysis based on facts and circumstances, following SC precedent in Universal Plast Limited v. CIT. Since the assessee was not engaged in business activity and merely let out immovable property for rental income without participating in management, the majority opinion including the Third Member agreed with classifying it as house property income. The tribunal ruled in favor of revenue authorities against the assessee&#039;s claim for business income classification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 15:50:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=837464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1226 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775158</link>
      <description>ITAT Visakhapatnam held that rental income from leased property should be classified as &quot;income from house property&quot; rather than &quot;income from business.&quot; The case involved an assessee who had discontinued business operations and leased premises to an educational society. The tribunal noted that no precise test exists for determining whether rental income falls under business income or house property, requiring case-by-case analysis based on facts and circumstances, following SC precedent in Universal Plast Limited v. CIT. Since the assessee was not engaged in business activity and merely let out immovable property for rental income without participating in management, the majority opinion including the Third Member agreed with classifying it as house property income. The tribunal ruled in favor of revenue authorities against the assessee&#039;s claim for business income classification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775158</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>