TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 139
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Appeals) -4 while passing the Appellate Order allowed the compensation received from tenanted premises to be treated as income from House property. 2. Second Ground of appeal relates to the Disallowance of Expenses incurred against the other operating income a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (Appeals) -4 while passing the Appellate Order did not consider the second ground of appeal regarding the genuine operating expenses to be allowed against the other operating income. The Appellant Company, therefore, prays the order of the learned assessing officer / CIT (Appeals) be amended to allow deductions / relief's claimed above. The Appellant Company also craves leave to add to, alter a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 27(iiib) of the Act by the Finance Act, 1987, by virtue of this provision in case of a lease for a term of not less than 12 years, the lessee is regarded as the owner of the property for the purposes of section 22 to 26 of the Act. On 31.12.2012, the assesse's representative filed the copies of rent receipts from 1986. Therefore, in the assessee's ease the assessee is in possession of the said property since 1986 i.e. exceeding 12 years. Therefore, the assessee is deemed owner of the property for purpose of determining "Income from House property." With regard to the Business property, the assessee's representative has argued that Sec.22 is specifically excluded from the Charging itself as the assessee is exploiting the prem....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ises to various clients and is getting compensation for the services rendered. From the fact that the tenants are fixed for a number of years, it cannot be assessed, based on facts, of providing office premises and used for commercial purpose. Thus, the assessee's vocation is in the nature of letting of premises for commercial purpose and not running a commercial centre. Therefore, the claim of the assessee that it is used for commercial purpose is only a deceit for tax purpose." He further relied on the Apex Court decisions in the case of CIT vs. Poddar Cement reported in 226 ITR 625, P.B. Jodha Ma! Kuthiala vs. CIT reported in 82 ITR 570 (SC) and Smarts (P) Ltd. vs. CIT [2008] reported in 166 Taxman 53(Delhi) and held that the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....support an obvious omission or to clear up doubts as to the meaning of the word "owner" in u/s. 22. In the light of the clear exposition of the position of a declaratory/certificatory Act, it is not necessary to multiply the authorities on this point. There is, therefore, no hesitation to hold that the amendment introduced by the Finance Bill, 1988 was declaratory/clarificatory in nature so for as it relates to cls. (iii), (iiia) and (iiib) of u/s. 27. Consequently, these provisions are retrospective in operation. In the context of u/s. 22, having regard to the ground realities and further having regard to the object of the IT Act, namely, 'to tax the income', 'owner' is a person who is entitled to receive income from the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of decisions of Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble High Courts as discussed in the preceding paragraph and also discussed in the assessment order, the action of the LAO is confirmed. Corresponding grounds of appeal are dismissed. 5. Against above order assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the learned departmental representative. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. It is noted that this appeal has been fixed for hearing on several occasions and none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. Hence we proceed to adjudicate the issue raised by hearing the learned departmental representative and perusing the records. 7. We find that in this case assessee has tenancy righ....