NEW DELHI HOTELS LTD vs. ACIT
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court held that rental income from unsold flats, which are stock-in-trade, should be assessed under the head 'Income from house property' and not 'Profits and gains from business and profession'. This decision followed previous judgments by the same court.
What were the facts?
The assessee, New Delhi Hotels Ltd, received rental income from unsold flats treated as stock-in-trade. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held this income to be taxable under 'Profits and gains from business and profession'. The assessee contended it should be taxed under 'Income from house property'.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was whether rental income from unsold stock-in-trade flats falls under 'business income' or 'income from house property'.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA Nos. 238/13,239/13&240/13 Page 1 of 4 THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 17.05.2013 + ITA 238/2013 + ITA 239/2013 + ITA 240/2013 NEW DELHI HOTELS LTD ... Appellant versus ACIT … Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Anoop Sharma For the Respondent : Mr Abhishekh Maratha CORAM:- HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. The present appeals have been filed on behalf of the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”) challenging the order dated 07.12.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal had, by the order dated 07.12.2012, disposed of three appeals being ITA Nos. 3742/DEL/2012, 3743/DEL/2012 and 1462/DEL/2012 which had been preferred by the
ITA Nos. 238/13,239/13&240/13 Page 2 of 4 revenue relating to the assessment year 2004-05, 2009-10 and 2008-09, respectively. 2. These appeals raise a common question and thus, have been taken up together. 3. The issue sought to be raised in the present appeals is:- “Whether the rental income derived from the unsold flats which are shown as stock-in-trade in the books of the appellant/assessee would fall within the head “Profits and gains from business and profession” or under the head, “income from house property”. 4. The Tribunal held that it would fall under the head of “profits and gains from business and profession”, whereas it is the appellant/assessee’s contention that it would fall within the head “income from house property”. It appears that this issue is no longer debatable in view of the decision in the case of CIT v Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. decided on 31.10.2012 in ITA No. 18/1999. That decision has, subsequently, been followed in CIT v. Discovery Estates Pvt. Ltd (in ITA Nos. 1089/11 and 1090/2011) and CIT v. Discovery Holding Pvt. Ltd. (in ITA No. 1097/2011) decided on 18.02.2013. One of the questions raised in Discovery Estates Pvt. Ltd and Discovery Holding Pvt. Ltd (supra) was “whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the rental income should be assessed in the income from the business and not under the head “income from house property”?” This court answered that question in the negative by
ITA Nos. 238/13,239/13&240/13 Page 3 of 4 following the decision in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (supra). 5. Mr Maratha appearing on behalf of the revenue contended that Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (supra) was a decision where the question was with regard to deemed rent on the basis of annual letting value (ALV) whereas in the present appeals, the issue is with regard to the actual rent received in respect of flats let out by the appellant/assessee. However, we find that in Discovery Estates Pvt. Ltd and Discovery Holding Pvt. Ltd (supra) the issue was in the backdrop of actual rent receipts and not on the basis of deemed rent. Therefore, the decision of this court in Discovery Estates Pvt. Ltd and Discovery Holding Pvt. Ltd (supra) would govern the present case also. 6. Consequently, while framing the question as to whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that rental income should be assessed under the head of “profits and gains from business and profession” and not under the head “income from house property”, we answer the same in the negative. We may add, however, that the learned counsel for the appellant had also taken the plea of consistency
ITA Nos. 238/13,239/13&240/13 Page 4 of 4 but, we have not examined the same as it was not necessary for us to do so because of the position indicated above. 7. These appeals are allowed as above. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 17, 2013 kb
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026