PRITI NIMISH PATEL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT - CC-25, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal followed its previous order and the Supreme Court's decision in Shambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd. It held that rental income from a building is assessable under the head 'income from house property'.
What were the facts?
The assessee offered income of Rs. 26.40 lakhs under the head 'income from house property'. The AO assessed this income under the head 'business income', which was confirmed by the CIT(A). The assessee's appeal is based on this issue.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether rental income should be taxed as 'income from house property' or 'business income'.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. v. CIT181 citing263 ITR 143 · 2003 · SC
Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- अनुसार Challenging the order dated 23/02/2015,of the CIT(A)-51,Mumbai,the assessee has filed the present appeal.Assessee,an individual,is carrying on business of manufacturing and sale of metallic yarn.During the year under appeal,she was also director of one company.Effective ground of appeal is about taxability of Rs. 26.40 lakhs under the head business income. Brief facts: 2.A search and seizure operation u/s.132 of the Act was conducted in the case of Patel Engineering Ltd. group of cases, on 16/12/2010. After recording satisfaction, a notice u/s.153C of the Act was issued to the assessee asking her to file the return of income for the year under consideration.She filed her return on 16/01/2013, declaring total income at Rs. 21.48 lakhs.Later on, on 27/02/2013, the assessee filed a revised return disclosing income of Rs. 15.89 lakhs.The assessee had offered income of Rs. 26,40,000/-was offered under the head income from house property, whereas, the AO following the order for the AY.2010-11 assessed the said income under the head business income. In the appellate proceedings, the First Appellate Authority (FAA)confirmed the order of the AO. 3.Before us the representatives of both the sides agreed that the issue stands decided in favour of the assessee by the order of the Tribunal dated 27/07/2016(ITA/3070/Mumbai/2015,AY. 2011-12).We would like to reproduce the said order and it reads as under: “2.The only grievance of the assessee relates to assessing rental income of Rs.29,04, 000/-offered under the head income from house property,as business income.
More judgments on Section 132
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Naresh Chandra Khattar, Agra vs ITO Ward-1(1)(2), AgraITA 475/AGR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026