JIGNESH KANJIBHAI SHAH GALA,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-12, PUNE
What were the facts?
The assessee, a proprietor and partner in a firm, owned business premises used by the partnership firm. The Assessing Officer treated the notional rental income from these premises as taxable in the assessee's hands, as the assessee had not offered any income from house property. The CIT(A) upheld this addition.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that if a property owned by a partner is used by the partnership firm for its business, no notional rental income is taxable in the hands of the partner. The Tribunal relied on previous decisions with similar facts.
What were the issues?
Whether notional rental income is taxable in the hands of a partner when the property owned by the partner is used by the partnership firm for its business purposes.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA
PER ASTHA CHANDRA, J.M.:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28-11-2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)/NFAC”], u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”), pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2018-19. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a proprietor of a business unit, namely, PETALS carrying on the business of retail trade of readymade garments. The assessee is also a partner in a partnership firm, namely, M/s. PETAL NX, which is also carrying on the retail trade business of readymade garments. The business premises from where the assessee is carrying on its proprietary business as well
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 22
- Anurag Konduru, Bangalore vs DCIT, Circle-2(2)(1), BangaloreITA 2845/BANG/2025[2023-24]Status: Disposed24 Sept 2026AY 2023-24
- Sree Sree Annapurna Devi Thakurani and… vs ITO, Ward 29(1), KolkataITA 1710/KOL/2026[2020-2021]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2020-2021
- ACIT, Mumbai vs Genext Hardware and Parks Private Limited…ITA 6208/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2017-18
- ACIT, Mumbai vs Sheth Developers Private Limited, MumbaiITA 6204/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
- Sheth Corp Private Limited, Mumbai vs ACIT-CC-4(2), MumbaiITA 5605/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Prakash Enterprises Its Proprietor Sudhir Kumar Choudhary vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Sree Narayan Construction vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- M/S Recro Furniture Private Limited vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 6 Oct 2026
- Ipca Laboratories LTD. vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Jt. Secretary, Dept. Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 6 Oct 2026
- Scottment Alco Bev Fillers PVT LTD vs. State Of ChhattisgarhChhattisgarh · 5 Oct 2026