PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-04 vs. M/S MICROSOFT INDIA (R AND D) PVT LTD

2022 [Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)] CM APPL.52444/2022

1 The record seems to reveal, that the respondent/assessee, in the revised return, had claimed the rent received from the subject building as “income from other sources”.

Unfortunately, the appellant/revenue has not placed on record, the entire record, in particular, the lease agreement.

Mr Abhishek Maratha, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, is directed to place the entire record before the Court, which will include the lease agreement; albeit, in electronic form.

We may note, that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short “Tribunal”] has ruled in favour of the respondent/assessee, and has reached a conclusion that rent received by the respondent/assessee was composite rent, and hence would fall under Section 56 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 i.e., income received from other sources.

Furthermore, counsel for the respondent/assessee, in support of his submission, has inter alia, relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sultan Brothers (P) Ltd vs Commissioner of Income-Tax (1964) 5 SCR 807. 6.1 In addition thereto, the respondent/assessee has also relied upon the judgments of this Court in Garg Dyeing & Processing Industries vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (2013) 212 Taxman 160 (Delhi) and Jay Metal Industries (P.) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-V, (2017) 249 Taxman 450 (Delhi).

List the matter on 20.01.2023. ITA 507/2022

Counsel for the parties will file their written submissions, not exceeding three pages each, at least three days before the next date of hearing.