2016 (10) TMI 1200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is appeal, assessee has raised the following Grounds of appeal:- "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the learned CIT CA) & Assessing Officer were correct in not following the judgment of Hon'bIe ITAT for A.Y. 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 & holding that the rental income received by the Assessee should be Assessed as Income from Other sources instead of Income from House property as declared by the Assessee. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the learned CIT(A) & Assessing Officer were correct in holding that the Assesssee is not a deemed owner as per section 27(iiib) r.w.s. 269 UA & as such was not entitled to declared income U/S 22 & claim standard deduction @ 30% U/S 24b of the Income Tax Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tly decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee, starting with the lead order for assessment year 2005-06 vide ITA No.3008/Mum/2008 dated 09/10/2009. In this context, the following discussion in the order of the Tribunal dated 9/10/2009(supra) is relevant:- "We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the assessee is in possession of the premises for the last 40 years. The premises were with M/s Bharat Import and Exports as tenant and this firm was dissolved vide dissolution of the partnership made on 3-4-1958. Thereafter the tenancy right in the premises were received by the assessee. The owners of the property M/s. Vrindavan Lal Goverdhan Lal have allowed the assessee firm to create sub-tenancy with the regard to the p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....-12-2010, 29-7- 2011, 09-01-2014 and 28/04/2015 respectively followed the earlier precedents in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2005-06 (supra) and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 3.1 In view of the aforesaid precedents the issue is liable to be decided in favour of the assessee. So however, we find that the CIT(A) has noted that the Tribunal erred in treating the assessee as a deemed owner in terms of section 27(iiib) r.w.s. 269 UA (f)(i) of the Act because the fact that the assessee was a mere licensor was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal in assessment year 2005-06. Notably, assessee has earned the rental income from ICICI Bank in terms of sub-tenancy dated 29/11/2000 and an agreement dated 24/11/2000 between assesse....