2011 (11) TMI 754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER. Appellant by: Shri Yogesh Thar Respondent by: Shri P.K.B. Menon ORDER PER R.S. PADVEKAR, JM These cross appeals, one by the assessee and another by the revenue, are filed for the A.Y. 2004-05 challenging the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A)-19, Mumbai dated 19.6.2008. We first take assessee's appeal being ITA 5819/M/2008. 2. The first issue is whether....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent 263 ITR 143 and has held that license fee is to be taxed as income from house property. We, therefore, following the order of the Tribunal on this issue and as fairly conceded by the Ld. Counsel hold that the 'license fee' from letting out activity is assessable under the head "income from house property" and not income from business. Accordingly, ground no.1 to 3 are dismissed. 4. The Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Tribunal has held as under:- "10. Learned CIT (A) has followed the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of J.K. Investors (Bombay) Ltd.., 112 Taxman 107 and held that notional interest cannot be added to annual rent receipt. 11. Learned DR relied on the decision of the Third Member in the case of ITO vs. Baker Technical Services (P) Ltd., 125 ITD 1 (TM). ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ived in advance should not be added to the same in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of J.V. Investors (Bombay) Ltd. (supra). We hold accordingly. The appeal of the revenue is dismissed." 12. Respectfully following the same, we uphold the order of the First Appellate Authority and dismiss ground No.1&2 of the revenue." 9. Now, this issue also stands cove....