ACIT, CIRCLE- 29(1), NEW DELHI vs. THATAI CONSULTANCY SERVICES LLP, NEW DELHI

ITA 6515/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 November 2021AY 2015-166 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the property was purchased as bare office space and the licensee was responsible for all fit-out works. Therefore, the income was rental income from house property, taxable under Section 22, and the CIT(A) correctly allowed interest expenses and partly deleted the addition.

What were the facts?

The assessee purchased a commercial property and rented it out. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated the rental income as composite rent and invoked Section 56(2)(iii), disallowing deductions for interest expenses and standard deductions. The CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the rental income from a commercial property is to be treated as composite rent under Section 56(2)(iii) or as income from house property under Section 22, and whether deductions for interest and standard deductions are allowable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 56(2)(iii),Section 22,Section 24

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri U.N. Marwah, CA
For Respondent: Shri Bhopal Singh, Sr. DR, Shri U.N. Marwah, CA
Hearing: 03/11/2021

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE,JM

This appeal is filed against the order dated 27.7.2018 passed by the CIT (A)-10, New Delhi by the revenue for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under :-

“1. “On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law on facts in not appreciating the findings of the AO during the course of the assessment proceeding.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the provisions of section 56(2) (iii)

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 56(2)(iii)

All 32 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →