MRS ALKA PANDEY,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -25(2), MUMBAI

ITA 5650/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 January 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY ( (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that income from providing space for antenna installation and glow sign boards is part of rental income from the building and taxable under 'income from house property'. However, income from 'watch and ward' and 'general maintenance' are services and taxable under 'income from other sources'.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared rental income from a building and amenities under 'income from house property' and claimed a 30% deduction. The Assessing Officer treated the income from amenities as 'income from other sources' and disallowed the deduction.

What were the issues?

Whether income from amenities provided along with building lease is taxable as 'income from house property' or 'income from other sources', and if the 30% deduction under Section 24(a) is admissible.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 24(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

  • 162 ITR 452
    162 ITR 452 · HC
    5 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “H (SMC

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Salukhe. Sr. DR
Pronounced: 29/01/2025

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 30.08.2022 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2015-16, raising following grounds:

1.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax erred in adding

Mrs. Alka Pandey Rs.161,704/- - as unreconciled rent received as per 26AS though as unreconciled rent received as per 26AS though the same being reimbursement for expense incurred. being reimbursement for expense incurred.

2.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned

2.

That on the fact

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 24(a)

All 318 judgments and leading authorities on Section 24(a) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →