INVOA INDIA,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 10(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3127/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 March 2022AY 2013-142 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee filed a petition to withdraw the appeal without conceding on merits, citing avoidance of protracted litigation and smallness of tax. The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14. The appeal concerned whether lease rent for a period exceeding 12 years should be assessed as income from house property.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the classification of lease rent income for long-term leases as income from house property, considering the definition of a deemed owner.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 27(iiib)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 29.03.2022Pronounced: 29.03.2022

आदेश /O R D E R

PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP:

1.

This appeal of assessee is arising out of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Chennai in dated 10.10.2017. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-10(2), Chennai for the assessment years 2013-14 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’), vide order dated 24.03.2016.

2 2. At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that he has filed petition dated 29.03.2022 for withdrawal of this appeal without conceding on merits of appeal, which reads as under:- The above appeal is posted for hearing on 29.03.2022. The issue on appeal is whether lease rent in respect of a lease agreement for a period in excess of 12 years should be assessed as income from house property particularly in view of provisions of section 27(iiib) defining a deemed owner. However, to avoid protracted litigation on the issue and the smallness of tax, it is prayed that the appellant may be permitted to withdraw the appeal without prejudice the Appellant’s claim on merits of the issue.

3.

When this was pointed out to ld. Senior DR, he has not raised any objection for withdrawal of appeal. Hence, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29th March, 2022 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 27(iiib)

All 59 judgments and leading authorities on Section 27(iiib) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →