TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 1016
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n assessed income of Rs. 11,04,41,597 thereby making additions under different heads. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) after considering the submissions of both the parties, partly allowed the appeals. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Revenue has filed the present appeal before us on the grounds mentioned hereunder : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not erred in law as well as on the facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,10,66,418 made by adding back one-third statutory deduction after treating the income from house property of Rs. 13,68,88,726 as income from business whereas the income received is of composite nature and not from the bare letting of the property ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has not erred in law as well as on the facts in deleting the addition made by adding back deduction of Rs. 4,10,66,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion and physical storage of booked documents, hence the income is not covered solely under the purview of income from house property as per the provisions of section 22 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the receipts are composite and cannot be segregated. 5. The learned Departmental representative also relied upon the written submissions filed by him on November 14, 2009 which are reproduced below : 1. The assessee was having a property situated in sector-62, Noida. The assessee entered into a service agreement on December 31, 2010 with M/s. PACL Ltd. As per the said agreement, the assessee was to provide services of receipt of documents/booklets, scanning the same using high quality latest scanners, keeping the documents for digital storage, auditing the documents in the digital form, indexing and storage of the same, maintaining software for documents for the location of the their hard copy, providing scanned images, etc. (clause 3 of the agreement). The services were to be performed at the prop erty of the assessee situated at Noida. 2. In consideration for various services performed by the assessee, it received/composite service charges Rs. 12.50 per booklet (clause 5 of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ume of the document handled during a particular time period. Such features of these composite activities performed are in the nature of business/profession and not in the nature of income from house property. 7. It is relevant to mention that M/s. PACL has deducted TDS upon such payment under section 194C of the Act by treating the same as contractual receipts and not under section 194-I as rental payments. 8. Though the Assessing Officer has not accepted the addendum, even if the addendum is considered, through which PACL had acquired control over the property, it would not change the nature of service agreement and nature of services performed on composite basis as per the addendum the control was taken by PACL to ensure confidentiality of the data only. 9. Storage was one of many services performed by the assessee and not the main service. Each and every service performed was equally important. The payments were made on composite basis for all the services rendered without specifying the bifurcation of each compo nent. Such income from the composite services would not have been possible in the hands of the assessee due to ownership of the building alone. Such income though....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the present case it is thus humbly requested that the assessee has carried out the business activities/adventure in the nature of trade by performing various composite services for M/s. PACL during the year and thus there was no justification for treating the storage component as income from house property. It is also relevant that the assessee has bifurcated the composite services receipt into two components without any basis whereas there was no such bifurcation was provided in the agreement. 12. Without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal, the assessee represented before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the amount of Rs. 21,93,848 may be disallowed on account of depre ciation on the building situated at Noida and lease rentals paid against the income from house property. However such claim and basis of the same was never made available to the Assessing Officer even during the remand proceedings. It is relevant to note that the assessee has claimed huge expenses in the profit and loss account such as depreciation on building (Rs. 57,17,278) repair maintenance (Rs. 1,12,67,679), service tax (Rs. 3,89,05,196), lease rent Noida (Rs. 22,15,510), consultation char....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... at Mohali was rented out to M/s. Spanco BPO Services Ltd. and rental income was included as income from house property in the computation of income and has been accepted by the Assessing Officer as such. The COI is forming part of paper book at pages 1 to 5. 5. As per the agreement dated December 31, 2010 the appellant had rented out the premises to PACL primarily for utilisation of its space to store records/booklets and the services of scanning, auditing, indexing and digital storage were merely ancillary/incidental to serve the main intention/purpose of providing physical storage. (page 28 to 37 of the paper book) 6. This agreement clearly specifies that the physical storage shall continue for till December 31, 2013 (para 2.4 and page 30 of the paper book) whereas the contract for ancillary services was for only one year, i. e., up to December 31, 2011 (para 4.2 and page 32 of the paper book). Therefore, physical storage was the prime intention of the appellant. 7. Further, addendum dated April 12, 2011 was made to clarify the terms of the agreement dated December 31, 2010 (pages 38 to 42 of paper book) and it was agreed that the site/space of premises, comprising approxi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng were merely incidental. 13. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the income shown by the appellant under the head 'income from house property' is business income and accordingly he taxed the same under the head 'income from business or profession' and standard deduction claimed under section 24(a) of the Act was disallowed vide order dated March 18, 2016. 14. Now, against the order passed by the worthy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Department is in appeal before your good self and our submission in this regard is as under : 15. Three conditions need to be satisfied before we tax the rental income as income from house properties which are : * Property must consist of land and building appurtenant thereto * The assessee must be the owner of such property. * The property may be used for any purpose but not for the purpose of business or profession carried on by the assessee. All the three conditions are satisfied in the case of the appellant and accordingly rental income is treated as income from house prop erty. Relationship between the appellant and PACL is of landlord and tenant and it....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....usi ness or the exploitation of his property by an owner. We do not further think that a thing can by its very nature be a commercial asset. A commercial asset is only an asset used in a business and nothing else, and business may be carried on with practically all things. There fore, it is not possible to say that a particular activity is business because it is concerned with an asset with which trade is commonly carried on. We find nothing in the cases referred, to support the propo sition that certain assets are commercial assets in their very nature.' Shambhu Investment P. Ltd. v. CIT as reported in [2003] 263 ITR 143 (SC) ; [2003] 129 Taxman 70 (SC) Section 22, read with section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Income from house property-Chargeable as-Assessment treating income derived by assessee-company from letting out office premises along with certain facilities and services to various persons as business income, was held by Commissioner under section 263 as erroneous and prejudicial to interests of Revenue and was set aside with direction to Assessing Officer to assess said income as property income-Prime object of assessee under said agreement was to let out por....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....am Properties (P.) Ltd. v. Jt. CIT as reported in [2006] 102 TTJ 345 (ITAT-Delhi) "Even if the said property was held by the assessee-company as stock-in-trade in its capacity as a trader going by the nature of its business activities, the rental income was not earned by it from the tenants in its capacity as a trader. On the other hand, when the vacant possession of the tenements was obtained by the assessee-company and the vacant tenements were sold to the different parties from time to time, the assessee-company acted as a trader in the said transactions and the income arising out of such transaction was rightly assessed to tax under the head 'Profits and gains of business or profession'. However, when it comes to the rental income, the said income was earned by the assessee-company not as a trader but as a owner of the said property and there was no business connection between the tenants and the assessee-company but it was a case of tenant-owner relationship." 18. With regard to ground No. 2 related to depreciation on UPS claimed by the assessee at 80 per cent. against as assessed by the Assessing Officer at 15 per cent., the issue is covered in the favour of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....llenging the findings of the Assessing Officer and thus, on the basis of the detailed submissions, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sought remand report from the Assessing Officer and consequently, the Assessing Officer furnished his remand report vide letter No. 18753 dated March 14, 2018. It is important to mention here that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) while deciding the appeal filed by the assessee had relied upon his own order pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13 as during the assessment year, detailed order was passed and since the issues were identical for both the years, therefore, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) relied his own findings recorded in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2012-13, therefore, considering these circumstances, we have also evaluated the orders passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) while disposing of this issue in its order in an appeal for the assessment year 2012-13. 11. We have meticulously perused all the documents placed in record by both the parties more particularly the documents contained in the paper book which runs from pages 1 to 269 which are in the s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bifurcated into Rs. 10.75 per booklet for providing storage space over a period of three years and Rs. 1.75 per booklet towards providing ancillary services like scanning, indexing, etc. 12. The main dispute in this case is whether the assessee was justified in bifurcating the receipts from M/s. PACL Ltd. as income under two heads, i. e., "income from house property" and "income from business". Initially the Assessing Officer had recorded his findings merely on the basis of the service agreement dated December 31, 2010 and has totally ignored the written addendum agreement executed between both the parties on April 12, 2011 which was clarificatory in nature and was in continuation and part of agreement dated December 31, 2010. Therefore, that the addendum agreement dated November 12, 2011 was the integral part of the service agreement dated December 31, 2010 and therefore, both the documents have to be read in continuation and in connection with each other. We notice that the Assessing Officer had ignored the addendum agreement as the same was not registered. Whereas it is also a factual position that even the agreement dated December 31, 2010 was also an unregistered document, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cated at C-56-A/10 and 11, Sector 62, Noida and at ITC-4, Sector 67, Mohali-160 062 to M/s. PACL India Limited and had also received a sum of Rs. 7 crores as advance towards sale of the said properties. (e) During the year under assessment, the assessee-company offered to tax Rs. 5,90,29,814 as income under the head 'house property' which included Rs. 4,17,64,004 from M/s. PACL India Limited and the balance Rs. 1,72,65,810 from M/s. Spanco BPO Services Limited. (f) The appellant had entered into a service agreement with M/s. PACL Ltd. on December 31, 2010. As per the agreement, the assessee is to undertake the service of scanning, indexing, auditing, digital and physical storage of booklets/documents. The relevant clauses of this agreement are reproduced below : (i) Service defined in clause 1 shall mean transformation of data in connection with a matter into the form specified by first party, (i. e., M/s. PACL Ltd.) and agreed to be second party, (i. e., M/s. Dr ITM Limited) in the work order. (ii) Work order is defined under clause 2 which includes auditing, scanning, digital storage, physical storage, backlog. (iii) Physical storage under clause 2.4 is defined ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the agreement dated December 31, 2010 provides the following : This is the addendum to the agreement signed on 31st day of December 2010 by PACL India Limited (hereinafter referred to as first party) and Dr. LT. Planets Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the second party). This document merely clarifies the existing terms of the agree ment dated December 31, 2010 as described hereinbelow. The first party had, vide agreement dated December 31, 2010, engaged the second party to primarily provide physical storage facility to stock its files/documents/booklets in any form. For this purpose the second party had, vide the said agreement dated December 31, 2010 agreed to physically store the booklets/documents/files in the site/ space located at C-56A/10 and 11, Sector-62, Noida-201 301. After the execution of agreement, the first party felt need of complete control and exclusive possession over the premises meant for storage of confidential records as a security point of view as well as the just party required access to the records as per the need of the first party at odd hours also. The first party did not want any kind of interference of the second party in the premises specifi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch house property. The ownership includes both freehold and leasehold rights and also included deemed ownership ; 3. The property may be used for any purpose, but it should not be used by the owner for the purpose of any business or profession carried on by him, the profit of which is chargeable to tax. 14. On consideration of the agreement, i. e., the main agreement dated December 31, 2010, addendum dated April 12, 2011 and other subsequent agreements which are detailed below : Sequence of agreements Sl. No. Name of agreement Date of agreement Period covered by agreement Period covered by agreement for storage 1. Service agreement 31-12-2010 1-1-2011 to 31-12-2011 31-12-2010 to 31-12-2013 Page Nos. 28-37 of paper book 2. Addendum to agreement dated 31-12-2010 12-4-2011 NIA NIA (Only about confidentiality) Page Nos. 38-42 of paper book 3. Supplementary agreement 21-11-2011 1-1-2012 to 30-5-2012 1-1-2012 to 30-5-2014 Page Nos. 43-45 of paper book 4. Revised supplementary agreement 27-2-2012 1-6-2012 to 30-11-2012 30-5-2012 to 30-11-2014 Page Nos. 46-48 of paper book 5. Revised supplementary agre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 49 (SC), Sultan Brothers P. Ltd. v. CIT [1964] 51 ITR 353 (SC), Shambhu Investment P. Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 143 (SC) and Raj Dadarkar and Associates v. Asst. CIT [2017] 394 ITR 592 (SC). (b) The assessee-company derives its income from rendering services in the field of information technology and a part of the said premises was also being utilised by the assessee for undertaking its business operations. The renting of the properties was never within the objects of the assessee and this is also clear from the objects of the memorandum and articles of associations. This fact has also been acknowledge by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order in so far as the rental income from M/s. Spanco BPO for renting out the premises at Mohali by the assessee has been assessed as 'income from house property'. The appellant has let out the part of the build ing at C-56AJ 10 and 11, Sector 62, Noida to PACL for storage of their records. The storage of the booklets was for a long period of time, i. e., up to three years and the services to be rendered were very less time taking and the expenditure thereon was mi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from house property" held the income from providing ware housing facilities to various parties including Hindustan Lever Ltd. as income from house property. (d) The Assessing Officer has emphasised on the point that the premises under consideration were the main premises where all the activities relating to the service agreement were undertaken. This conclusion was drawn by the Assessing Officer because of his igno rance of the addendum by which a separate exclusive space of approximately 40,000 square feet in the same premises was earmarked for the storage of the documents of PACL. Even other wise, a part of the same premises can be used for the business of the assessee and a part thereof can be let out. (e) The Assessing Officer has stated that in order to undertake the services provided under the agreement, the assessee had made suitable changes in the premises such as providing equipment, manpower, system for retrieval of the document, etc. This conclusion of the Assessing Officer had been drawn on the basis of clause 6.6 of the agreement which provides that the hard copy of the booklets should be handled with care and stored in high quality plastic bags. Further, they had....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aj Dadarkar and Associates v. Asst. CIT [2017] 394 ITR 592 (SC) has consistently held that in order to determine the head under which the income shall fall, the true char acter/substance of the transactions had to be seen. The fact that the PACL had deducted TDS at two per cent. instead of 10 per cent. will not change the character of receipt which has to be seen in the total ity of the circumstances. This view also supported by the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kedarnath Jute Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 363 (SC). (h) The Assessing Officer has recorded a finding that the appellant had devised a self-styled system to bifurcate the receipts to claim deduction under section 24(a) and reduced its tax liability. This view of the Assessing Officer was culmination of his findings that the income of the assessee was only 'income from business'. It has been discussed elaborately by me in this order that this view of the Assess ing Officer was not correct and the bifurcation done by the assessee is as per law and hence this finding of the Assessing Officer is not jus tified. (i) In the remand report dated March 13, 2018 the Assessing Officer has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that memorandum and articles of the assessee-company does not have a clause regarding renting of the property as an object of the company and hence it strengthens the argument that the assessee has not let out the property. This conclusion of the Assessing Officer is contrary to the settled legal position that not having renting has an object of the company, strengthens the case that the income from the property has to be assessed as 'income from house property'." 16. We have also considered the decisions in the case of East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. (a) East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT [1961] 42 ITR 49 (SC), the facts before the apex court were that an assessee, which was incorporated with the objects of buying and developing landed properties and promoting and developing markets, had purchased ten bighas of land at Calcutta and had set up a market through construction of shops and stalls, thereon. The assessee let-out shops/stalls on rent and rental income so earned was offered to tax as business income, which was assessed as income from house property by the Assessing Officer. In the aforesaid background, the question be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Supreme Court on this issue is in the case of Raj Dadarkar and Associates v. Asst. CIT [2017] 394 ITR 592 (SC). In that case the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority ("MHADA") had constructed certain residential buildings. However, certain area in the aforesaid housing projects was to be reserved for retail market. Maharashtra Housing and Area Develop ment Authority, therefore handed over the ground floor (stilt portion) of the above said buildings to Market Department of Municipal Corporation Greater Bombay ("MCGB"). In 1993, the market depart ment of the Municipal Corporation Greater Bombay auctioned the market portion on a monthly licence (stallage charges) basis to run a municipal market. The assessee-firm participated in the auction to acquire the right to construct the market on the market portion. The assessee was the successful bidder and was handed over possession of the market portion on May 28, 1993. The premises allotted to the assessee was a bare structure, on stilt that is, pillar/column, sans even four walls. In terms of the auction, the assessee was to make the entire premises fit to be used a market, including construction of walls, construction of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax Appellate Tribunal was also confirmed by the High Court. On further appeal, the apex court, too, confirmed the order of the High Court and held that the rental income earned by the assessee was to be assessed under the head "income from house property", being the specific head of income dealing with rental income, notwithstanding that the said activity was carried on by the assessee as part of its main object. The relevant observations of the apex court in this regard are as under (page 607 of 394 ITR) : "13. Before dealing with the respective contentions, we may state, in a summary form, scheme of the Act about the computation of the total income. Section 4 of the Act is the charging section as per which the total income of an assessee, subject to statutory exemptions, is chargeable to tax. Section 14 of the Act enumerates five heads of income for the purpose of charge of Income-tax and computation of total income. These are : salaries, income from house property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources. A particular income, therefore, has to be classified in one of the aforesaid heads. It is on that basis rules for computing i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....which has to be applied to determine whether the income would be chargeable under the head 'Income from house property' or it would be chargeable under the head 'Profits and gains from business or profession', is the question. It may be mentioned, in the first instance, that merely because there is an entry in the objects clause of the business showing a particular object, would not be the determinative factor to arrive at a conclusion that the income is to be treated as income from business. Such a question would depend upon the circumstances of each case. It is so held by the Constitution Bench of this court in Sultan Brothers P. Ltd. v. CIT [1964] 51 ITR 353 (SC) and we reproduce the relevant portion thereof (page 358) : 'We think each case has to be looked at from a businessman's point of view to find out whether the letting was the doing of a business or the exploitation of his property by an owner. We do not further think that a thing can by its very nature be a commercial asset. A commercial asset is only an asset used in a business and nothing else, and business may be carried on with practically all things. There fore, it is not possible to say th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see has made bifurcation of the receipt from the occupiers of the shops/stalls as rent and service charges. As rightly held by the Assess ing Officer, the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment P. Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 143 (SC) will apply. The assessee has not established that he was engaged in any systematic or organised activity of providing service to the occupiers of the shops/stalls so as to constitute the receipts from them as busi ness income. In our opinion, the assessee received income by letting out shops/stalls ; and therefore, the same has to be held as income from house property.' 18. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal being the last forum in so far as factual determination is concerned, these findings have attained finality. In any case, as mentioned above, the learned counsel for the appellant did not argue on this aspect and did not make any efforts to show as to how the aforesaid findings were perverse. It was for the appellant to produce sufficient material on record to show that its entire income or substantial income was from letting out of the property which was the principal business activity of the appellant. No ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ouse property had not altered because it was received by the company formed with the object of developing and setting up properties.' 20. In Rayala Corporation (P.) Ltd. the fact situation was identical to the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. and for this reason, Rayala Corporation (P.) Ltd. followed Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. which is held to be inapplicable in the instant case. 21. For the aforesaid reasons, we are of the opinion that these appeals lack merit and are, accordingly, dismissed with costs." (e) In the case of CIT v. Indian Warehousing Industries Ltd. [2002] 258 ITR 93 (Mad) the hon'ble High Court of Madras held that the source of the income being the warehouses, it matters little as to who the lessee for the time being is, whether it is the same lessee continuing over a period of time or a shifting class of lessees who occupied the spaces for shorter periods and paid rental for such use and as such the same is income from house property. (f) In the case of Nutan Warehousing Co. (P.) Ltd. v. ITO on August 31, 2006, [2007] 106 TTJ 137 (Pune) the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench wherein considering the various decisio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, the contracts in the present case oblige the assessee to make available information and render services to the foreign Government of the nature outlined in section 80-O, it is the duty of the Revenue and the right of the assessee to see that the consideration paid under the contract legitimately attributable to such information and services is apportioned and the assessee given the benefit of the deduction avail able under the section to the extent of such consideration." (h) In the case of Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 547 (SC), where the assessee-company, in addition to letting out of a building owned by it, provided other amenities/services to the tenants and those tenants in addition to paying rents, made separate payments for the other services/amenities provided by the assesseecompany, like, charges for electric current, for use of lifts, for the supply of hot and cold water, for the arrangement for scavenging, for providing watch and ward facilities as well as other amenities. The question before the apex court was whether rendering of such services to the tenants by the assessee-company, which owned the building, would constitute business activity. Their....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Commis sioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has also rightly bifurcated the consideration received from PACL Ltd. under the two heads of income, i. e., "income from house property" and "income from business". We have also metic ulously considered that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has correctly bifurcated the consideration received under the two heads by considering the bifurcation as carried out by the assessee which is contained in para 10.6.1 of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the same is reproduced below : "10.6.1 During the previous year under consideration the appellant has received the consideration of Rs. 12.50 per booklet from M/s. PACL as per the contract entered into between the parties on Decem ber 31, 2010. This composite amount has been bifurcated by the assessee between 'income from house property' and 'income from business'. Rs. 10.75 per booklet has been shown as income towards providing storage space to be spread over three years and Rs. 1,75 per booklet towards providing other services like scanning, indexing, etc. The bifurcation has been done by the assessee on the following basis. We also wish to hi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed which includes 6 pages of special power of attorney, will and two empty pages which are not to be scanned and as such there are 12 pages when folded and 6 pages when unfolded which are to be scanned. Therefore, the scanning charges per page, i. e., Rs. 1.75/6 pages comes out to Rs. 0.29 per page. Here, it is worthwhile to mention that the assessee-company has also done the scanning work of the High Court of Delhi at the rate of Rs. 0.28 (plus taxes) per page which is easily comparable with the rate charged to PACL Limited, i. e., Rs. 0,29 (plus taxes) per page (copy of the work order is enclosed as per annexure XV). It is prayed that this scientific allocation be accepted. In making the aforesaid addition, the Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the assessee has correctly bifurcated the total con sideration on scientific basis and allocation for scanning works out fully comparable with the similar services rendered to the High Court, Moreover, the Assessing Officer has never confronted the assessee for the same during the assessment proceedings. Thus, the aforesaid action of the Assessing Officer is not based on the correct apprecia tion of facts and position in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), thus, we have no reasons to interfere into or deviate from the findings so recorded by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Therefore, this ground raised by the Revenue stands dismissed. Ground No. 4 18. This ground is by the Revenue relating to challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in deleting the additions made on account of claim of depreciation. 19. We have heard the counsels of both the parties, we have also perused the material placed on record, judgments cited by the respective parties, and the orders passed by the Revenue authorities. Before we decide the merits of this ground, it is necessary to evaluate the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has decided this ground in para No. 7 of its order and the operative portion is contained in para No. 7.3 which is reproduced hereunder : "7.3 I have considered the submissions of the appellant and the order of the Assessing Officer. The issue of disallowance of the claim of deduction under section 24(a) of Rs. 2,16,02,474 on the basis of the Assessing Officer's ....