JK Investors (Bombay) Ltd vs. ACIT - Itatonline.org

ITA Nos.7858 & 7851 of 2011 JK Investors (Bombay) Ltd Mumbaino letting of installation of air-conditioning plant.Therefore, there was no letting of installation of airconditioningplant. Therefore, there was no inseparableletting of the machinery so as to bring the case undersection 56(2)(iii). The Court held that the income wastaxable under the head "Income from house property".Similar is the case of the appellant where there is notseparate letting of the amenities and facilities by theappellant. In fact the facilities are provided by thebuilder themselves which are a part of the premises letout. Accordingly, the compensation received from the usesuch facilities partakes the character of income fromletting out of property and therefore taxable as incomeunder the head income from house property.The appellant submits that on the similar facts thelearned CIT(A) has allowed appellant's appeal for AY2000-01,2001-02, 2002-03, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. Copies of the same are enclosed alongwith this appeal and marked as Annexure "B" to "B6".The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in A. Y. 2000-01, A. Y.2001-02, A. Y. 2002-03 and A. Y. 2004-05 inappellant's case vide its order dated 5 th January, 2007,10 1h December, 2007, 12 th December, 2008, 9 thSeptember 2010 respectively, has upheld the said orderof the CIT(A). Copies of the same are enclosed along withthis appeal and marked as Annexure "C" to "C3".Accordingly, the Assessing Officer be directed to assessthe compensation received as "Income from houseproperty" and accordingly grant additional deductionunder section 24 of the Act to the extent of Rs.36,95,472/-“.37. The DR relied on order of AO where as AR reiterated thesubmissions made before the revenue authorities and relied on thedecision of the CIT(A).38. After going through the entire facts, we find that the issuestands covered in the assessee's own cases by the coordinate Benchdecisions, in ITA no. 6967 & 6623/Mum/2003 and ITA no.822/Mum/2007 and ITA no. 9545/Mum/2004.39. Respectfully following the decisions of the assessee's owncases as mentioned above and placing reliance on the decision ofBhaktawar Constructions Pvt. Ltd., reported in 162 ITR 452 (Bom),We uphold the observations of the CIT(A) and reject the appeal filedPage 20 of 21http://www.itatonline.org