JEHANGIR H C JEHANGIR,MUMBAI vs. ASST 12(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1820/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 March 2016AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that an application for withdrawal of the appeal was filed by the assessee. The Departmental Representative had no objection to the withdrawal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order confirming the treatment of amenities income as 'Income From Other Sources' and disallowing expenses under Section 14A. During the hearing, the assessee did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether income from amenities should be treated as 'Income From House Property' or 'Income From Other Sources', and the allowability of expenses related to exempt income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri C.N. Prasad, & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri Ajay (DR)
Hearing: 16/03/2016

18/02/2016 सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing : 16/03/2016 आदेश क� तार�ख /Date of Order: आदेश / O R D E R Per Ashwani Taneja (Accountant Member): This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai- 23 {(in short ‘CIT(A)’}, order dated 24.01.2014 passed against assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated 19.12.2011 for the Assessment Year 2009-10 on the following grounds:

“On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,

2 Jehangir HC Jehangir the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-23 has erred in confirming the treatment given by the learned Income Tax Officer to Income received from Amenities as ‘Income From Other Sources’ as against our claim of ‘Income from House Property.’ 2. Without prejudice to the generality of the contentions raised hereinabove in Ground of Appeal no.1, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Officer be directed to allow the expense incurred against the amount charged and recovered for Amenities.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals0-23 has erred in confirming the disallowed of Rs.4,28,618/- made u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 80D especially when the appellant has not claimed any expenses in relation to earning such exempt income.

4. Your Appellant craves to consider each of the above Grounds of Appeal without prejudice to each other and craves leave to add, amend or alter or to furnish fresh and/or detailed Grounds of Appeal. ”

2.

During the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the Assessee and Shri Ajay, Departmental Representative (DR) appeared on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

During the course of hearing it was noted that an application has been filed requesting for permission of withdrawal of the appeal.

3 Jehangir HC Jehangir 3.1. Ld. DR made no objection for allowing us to withdraw the appeal of the assessee.

3.2. In view of these circumstances, we permit the assessee to withdraw the appeal.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16th March , 2016.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →