TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 635
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."], for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. The present appeal has been listed for hearing before us pursuant to order dated 22/04/2019, passed by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal under section 254(2) of the Act, in MA No. 574/Mum/2018 in ITA No. 3009/Mum/2016, whereby earlier order dated 09/05/2018, passed under section 254(1) of the Act was rectified to the extent that observation of the Tribunal in respect of ground No. 3, raised in assessee's appeal, was recalled and appeal was directed to be listed for hearing in that regard. 3. Ground No. 3, raised in assessee's appeal, is as under: "3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the exemption u/s 11 was not admissible for the reason that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as given on rent by registered tenancy agreement dated 02/01/2010, on payment of premium of Rs. 41 lakh and a monthly rental of Rs. 3485 per month. The assessee further submitted that the entire building is under use and occupation of statutory tenants whose tenancies are protected under the Rent Control Act, therefore, the trust is only eligible to the standard rent from the protected tenants. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 28/03/2013, passed under section 143(3) of the Act, inter-alia, held that property of the trust is under possession and use by the company Drishti Advertising Pvt. Ltd. in which trustees, who are covered under section 13(3), are interested and same is being used by the said company at the rent rate much lesser t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that amount of Rs. 41 lakh is an adequate compensation for grant of tenancy rights, which was negotiated and agreed upon. Learned DR further submitted that the one-time premium and rent paid per month by the assessee is significantly lower than the market value as determined by stamp duty authorities. Further, learned DR submitted that New India Assurance paid rent at Rs. 4 per sq.ft. to the assessee trust. 8. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The only grievance of the assessee, in ground No. 3, is against denial of exemption under section 11 of the Act, inter-alia, on the basis that property of the trust was given on rent at comparatively lower rate to a company in which trustee, pers....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ession and use by a company Drishti Advertising Pvt. Ltd, in which trustees are interested, who are covered under section 13(3) of the Act and the rent charged is much lesser than the market rate. In appeal, learned CIT(A), by comparing the rent received from another tenant i.e. M/s. Bullworker Pvt. Ltd., dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on this issue. 9. In the present case, it has not been denied that the entire building is under use and occupation of statutory tenants whose tenancies are protected under the Rent Control Act and the trust is only eligible to the standard rent from the statutory tenants. Thus, any comparison in respect of the rent received by the assessee can only be made with the rent charged to other tenants....