Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Per Amarjit Singh (AM):
The present appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 11.10.2022 for A.Y. 2013-14. The assesse has raised the following grounds before us:
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in law as well on facts in dismissing all the grounds of appeals of your appellant.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in law as well on facts in treating business Income of your appellant as Income from House Property without giving any reasons for his doing so and thereby confirming the addition made by the ACIT amounting to Rs.14,07,420/-. The CIT(A) should have considered the nature of receipt and should have accordingly pronounced his order.
The Learned ACIT was highly unjustified in making an arbitrary addition of Rs.45,408/- by applying the provisions of Section 14A with rule 8D
P a g e | 2 The appellant further craves the leave to put in additional grounds of appeal if any at the time of hearing.”
The fact in brief is that return of income declaring total income of Rs.67,70,930/- was filed on 28.10.2013. The case was subject to scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was issued on 03.09.2014. During the course of assessment the assessing officer noticed that assessee has shown rent receipt from property to the amount of Rs.20,10,600/- under the head business income. Out of the aforesaid rent receipt after claiming expenditure the assesse has shown profit of Rs.10,40,460/-. However, the A.O has treated the aforesaid receipt as income from house property and after allowing 30% of deduction determined the income from house property at Rs.14,07,420/-. During the course of assessment the A.O has also noticed that assessee has made investment in shares and mutual funds of Rs.90,81,500/-, therefore, determined disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D to the amount of Rs.45,408/- being the expenditure attributable to earning exempt income.
Aggrieved, the assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee reiterating the facts reported by the A.O.
Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The ld. CIT(A) stated that in spite of issuing repeated notices no detail has been filed by the assessee. In the form of 35 filed before the ld. CIT(A) the assesse has categorically claimed that his case is covered by the decision of ITAT as in the earlier year the similar issue of rent receipt on identical facts was adjudicated in favour of the assessee wherein it is held that rent received is business income. However, the ld. CIT(A)
P a g e | 3 Place: Mumbai Date 27.03.2023 Rohit: PS
P a g e | 4 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
सत्यावपि प्रवि //// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.