TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (5) TMI 239
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of unsold units lying vacant, held as stock-in-trade( Inventory). 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has erred in continuing the addition. following the ratio of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Ltd. without appreciating the fact that SLP has been granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the decision. 4 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has failed to appreciate that amendment to Income Tax Act to Section 23(5) to tax Notional Deemed House Property Income oil units. Inventory is prospective and therefore conversely there are no provisions to tax the same in AY 2013-14. 5 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has erred in not considering various case laws cited by the appellant. 6. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) 52 has erred in not considering that no income under the head House Property is to be computed taking the ALV at 8.5% of the cost ignoring the various case laws holding the municipal ratable value be taken as ALV. The appellant prays that the addition of Rs. 12,22,683/- be deleted." 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 30.09.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r is on the file. The relevant finding has been given in para no. 7 which is reproduced as under.:- "7. We have heard the rival submissions. The Ld. AR at the outset placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 296 ITR 661 (Guj) which had held that where the property was held as stock in trade of the assessee, then the said property would partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from business and not income from house property. In the instant case, admittedly, the assessee had treated the unsold flats at Jolly Bhavan and Aurovilla as its stock in trade. It is not in dispute before us that the assessee had not let out its unsold flats at Jolly Bhavan and Aurovilla to any person and had rather actually occupied the same for the purpose of its business. Hence, there cannot be any assessment of notional rental income or deemed rental income under the head 'income from business' in the absence of specific provisions contained in the statute. At this juncture, it would be pertinent to note that the amendment brought in by the Finance Act 2017 w.e.f. 01/04/2018 wherein a new ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om a perusal of Sec. 22 of the Act that the 'annual value' of any property consisting of any building or land appurtenant thereto of which the assessee is the owner, other than such portions of such property as he may occupy for the purposes of any business or profession carried on by him the profits of which are chargeable to income tax, shall be chargeable to income tax under the head 'Income from house property'. Further, the determination of the 'annual value' of the property is envisaged in Sec. 23 of the Act. Sec. 23(1)(a) contemplates that the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year is to be deemed as the 'annual value' of the property which though might not have been let out by the assessee. 8. We have deliberated at length on the issue under consideration in the backdrop of the aforesaid statutory provisions, and are of the considered view that though the 'annual value' of a property simpliciter owned by an assessee would be liable to be assessed under the head 'Income from house property', however a similar treatment cannot be accorded to a property which is held by the assessee as stock-in-trade of his business. In our considere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wer authorities had relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) and had therein concluded that the notional lettable value of the unsold flats held by the assessee was liable to be determined and brought to tax under the head 'Income from house property'. We find that the issue under consideration before us i.e whether the notional lettable value of the property held by an assessee as stock-in-trade in its business as that of a developer is liable to be assessed under the head 'income from house property', has been differently answered by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in CIT Vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj) and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 186 (Del). We are of the considered view that in the backdrop of the aforesaid conflicting views of the aforesaid non-jurisdictional High Courts, the view in favour of the assessee as had been arrived at by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat is to be preferred. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ....