No AI summary yet for this case.
Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य, बी सद�य बी बी. . . . आर बी आर आर. . . . बा�करन आर बा�करन बा�करन केकेकेके अनुसार बा�करन अनुसार अनुसार/ Per B.R. Baskaran, AM- अनुसार The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10-07-2014 passed by Ld CIT(A)-12, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2009-10. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in confirming the assessment of receipts pertaining to maintenance charges as income from house property and thereby rejecting the claim of various expenses.
The assessee has rented out a building. It declared rental income of Rs.44.29 lakhs, receipts pertaining to maintenance charges of Rs.1,10,04,000/- and receipts relating to antenna charges of Rs.7,82,852/-. The assessee declared the rental receipts under the head Income from house property and declared other two receipts as income from other sources. The assessee also claimed various expenses against the income declared under the head Income from other sources. The AO took the view that the assessee has split the rental income into two categories and accordingly assessed the receipts pertaining to maintenance charges also under the head Income from house property. In this process, he also disallowed claim
5670/M/14 M/s. Mahalaxmi Engineering Co.Pvt.Ltd. of various expenses. The Ld CIT(A) also confirmed the same and hence the assessee has filed this appeal.
The Ld A.R submitted that an identical view was taken by the AO in assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08, but the same was reversed by the Ld CIT(A). The decision of Ld CIT(A) was challenged before the Tribunal by the revenue and the Tribunal, vide its order dated 18-12-2015 passed in & others, has upheld the view taken by Ld CIT(A). On the contrary, the Ld D.R submitted that the Tribunal has confirmed the order passed by Ld CIT(A) only on the reasoning that the findings given by Ld CIT(A) in those years were not controverted by Ld D.R. He submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has pointed out in this year that the assessee has failed to furnish separate agreements and did not provide the details of services provided.
In the rejoinder, the ld A.R submitted that the matters may be restored to the file of the AO for examining them afresh in the light of decision rendered by the Tribunal in the earlier years, referred supra. The Ld D.R also agreed to the same.
Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of the assessing officer for examining them afresh. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the details before the AO to support its contentions.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th November, 2017. आदेश क� घोषणा खुले �यायालय म� �दनांक 28 नवंबर, 2017 को क� गई । Sd/- Sd/- (राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी / Ram Lal Negi) (बी बा�करन / B.R. Baskaran) राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी बी बी. . . . आर बी आर आर. . . . बा�करन आर बा�करन बा�करन �याियक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक/Dated : 28.11.2017. Jv.Sr.PS. अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत 1.Appellant /अपीलाथ� 2. Respondent /� यथ� 2
5670/M/14 M/s. Mahalaxmi Engineering Co.Pvt.Ltd.