TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (12) TMI 876
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssable under the head "Income from other sources", as opposed to "Income from house property" returned by the appellant. 1.1 That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in consequently confirming disallowance of deduction of Rs, 11,04,250 claimed by the appellant under section 24(a) of the Act. 2. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the disallowance of Rs. 2,27,379 made by the assessing officer on account of construction expenses of Vikram Tower had resulted in double disallowance. 2.1 Without prejudice, that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not adjudicating the claim of allowance of Rs. 2,27,379 on the ground that the claim was not made by filing a revised return, without appreciating that the embargo/ prohibition as per the case of Goetze India Limited: 154 Taxman 1 (SC) does not apply to the powers of the appellate authority to entertain any fresh/ new claim. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, supplement, amend, vary, withdraw or otherwise modify the grounds mentioned hereinabove at or before the time of hearing.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd. It is noticed that the issue under consideration now has been settled by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case vide aforesaid referred to order dated 25.03.2015 wherein the relevant findings have been given in paras 19 to 23 which read as under: "19. The crucial test is as to whether the letting out has a definite nexus with the business of the assessee. In our opinion, the approach of both the AO and the ITAT in the case at hand has been totally misdirected. Wrong classification of the licensed space in the books of account as stock-in-trade cannot change the character of the transaction concerning its eventual exploitation. The use of the expression "leave and licence" in the agreement entered with M/s Arvind Mills Ltd. (Telecommunication) may be debatable. The fact remains that the use of the terrace floor has been handed over to the licensee not only for setting up the tower/mast on which antenna is to be mounted but also for construction of a room where the watch/ ward staff can be stationed and space used for storage purposes. 20. Unlike the case of Mukherjee Estate (P.) Ltd. (supra) where no space on the terrace floor was let out ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Flat. The AO asked the assessee to submit the details and explained as to why these expenses may not be treated as capital in nature and that the First Floor at Vikram Tower was let out to Bank of Baroda and income from which was declared under the head "income from house property", so no depreciation was allowable. Since, no reply was filed by the assessee, therefore, the AO treated those expenses as capital in nature and disallowed the claim of the assessee. 13. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) who sustained the disallowance made by the AO. 14. Now the assessee is in appeal. 15. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, while deciding the first issue relating to the income received by the assessee from the rent of the same building for which the impugned expenses were incurred on account of repair, we have held in the former part of this order by following the judgment of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court that the income to be held under the head house property and deduction u/s 24(a) of the Act for repairs to be allowed. Since, the repairs & mainten....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f investment in Balance sheet on the 1sl day and last day of previous year, income from which does not or shall not form part of the total income C= average of total assets in Balance sheet on the 1SI day and last day of previous year Nil 3 An amount equal to ½% of average value of investment in Balance sheet on the 1st day and last day of previous year, income from which does not or shall not form part of the total income = 0.5 % of (1.61 crore + 1.70 crore)/2 Rs. 2,750/- Expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income = Rs. 82,750/- 4.8 In view of the above discussion, the disallowance of Rs. 82,750 is to be made u/s 14A of I. Tax Act being the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to earning of exempt income, which does not form part of total income." (Addition : Rs. 82,750/-) 20. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee furnished a calculation of disallowance thereby offering disallowance of Rs. 47,767/- by adopting the same method which was accepted by the ITAT for the assessment year 2008-09. The ld. CIT(A) did not find merit in the submissions of the assessee by obs....