Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. v. CIT

259 ITR 567High Court2003#6609 most cited

What is Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Service charges collected by a landlord from tenants for providing services and amenities are assessable as business income, especially when separate consideration is charged for rent and these services.

17

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Attukal Shopping Complex · CIT · 259 ITR 567 · service charges · business income · rental income · landlord · tenants · separate consideration

Judgments citing Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. v. CIT

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -3 (1), Indore vs. M/S M.P. Entertainment and Developers Private Limited, Indore

ITA 203/IND/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit GaurFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 28

…commercial purposes to run and operate a shopping mall which cannot be said to be a mere letting out of the property. 4.5. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Attukal Shoppin Complex Pvt. Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR 567 (Ker.) wherein it was held that income from chopping complex would be separately assessable as income from house property from letting out shops and income from business for the amenities provided. 4.5.5 The Assessing Officer has also relied upon the case laws of various Courts in the context of determination of income under section 22 of the Act…

The DCIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. M.P. Entertainment & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 344/IND/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit GaurFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 28

…commercial purposes to run and operate a shopping mall which cannot be said to be a mere letting out of the property. 4.5. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Attukal Shoppin Complex Pvt. Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR 567 (Ker.) wherein it was held that income from chopping complex would be separately assessable as income from house property from letting out shops and income from business for the amenities provided. 4.5.5 The Assessing Officer has also relied upon the case laws of various Courts in the context of determination of income under section 22 of the Act…

The DCIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. M.P. Entertainment & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 118/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit GaurFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 28

…commercial purposes to run and operate a shopping mall which cannot be said to be a mere letting out of the property. 4.5. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Attukal Shoppin Complex Pvt. Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR 567 (Ker.) wherein it was held that income from chopping complex would be separately assessable as income from house property from letting out shops and income from business for the amenities provided. 4.5.5 The Assessing Officer has also relied upon the case laws of various Courts in the context of determination of income under section 22 of the Act…

The DCIT-3(1), Indore vs. M/S. M.P. Entertainment & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Indore

ITA 117/IND/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kamal Garg & Arpit GaurFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mitra, CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 28

…commercial purposes to run and operate a shopping mall which cannot be said to be a mere letting out of the property. 4.5. The Assessing Officer has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Attukal Shoppin Complex Pvt. Ltd. (2003) 259 ITR 567 (Ker.) wherein it was held that income from chopping complex would be separately assessable as income from house property from letting out shops and income from business for the amenities provided. 4.5.5 The Assessing Officer has also relied upon the case laws of various Courts in the context of determination of income under section 22 of the Act…

Travancore Sugars and Chemicals Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/12/2008HC Kerala31 Mar 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

…d case is in tune with the ratio of the Supreme Court in Karanpura Development Co. Ltd.; Shri Lakshmi Silk Mills Limited etc. or expanding the dictum. The view in Malabar and Pioneer Hosiery (P.) Ltd case is incorrect and far 7 (1964) ITR 353 8 (2003) 259 ITR 567 ITA Nos.11/2008, 12/2008, 279/2010, 282/2010, 292/2010 -18- beyond the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the same judgments on which the assessee is relying. 6.2 Firstly, it is argued that the ratio of Malabar and Pioneer Hosiery (P.) Ltd case in all fours is applicable to the case on hand, and, secondly, from the very na…

Travancore Sugars and Chemicals Ltd vs. Deputy Commssr;Income Tax, C-I, Thiruvalla

ITA/279/2010HC Kerala31 Mar 2022

Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS,HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

…d case is in tune with the ratio of the Supreme Court in Karanpura Development Co. Ltd.; Shri Lakshmi Silk Mills Limited etc. or expanding the dictum. The view in Malabar and Pioneer Hosiery (P.) Ltd case is incorrect and far 7 (1964) ITR 353 8 (2003) 259 ITR 567 ITA Nos.11/2008, 12/2008, 279/2010, 282/2010, 292/2010 -18- beyond the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the same judgments on which the assessee is relying. 6.2 Firstly, it is argued that the ratio of Malabar and Pioneer Hosiery (P.) Ltd case in all fours is applicable to the case on hand, and, secondly, from the very na…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 4, Guwahati vs. M/S. A. T. C. Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 170/GTY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 169/Gau/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 170/Gau/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, M/S Atc Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Aayakar Bhwawan, 5Th C/O. Atc Assam Ltd, Kedar Vs. Floor, Christanbasti, G.S. Road, Road, Machkhowa, Guwahati-781005 Guwahati-781001 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. Aagca5209A

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sengupta, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate
Section 143Section 22

…by different High-courts in cases such as: Brijnath Brijmohan & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 161 ItR 234 (Bombay) CIT vs. New India Maritime Agencies (P) Ltd. 256 ITR 513 (Madras) Rampur Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 82 ITR 23 (Allahabad) Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. vs. CIT 259 ITR 567 (Kerala) CIT vs. Mithila Properties Publication & Contractor Enterprises (P) Ltd 228 ITR 713 The following observation made by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case CIT vs. Indian Overseas Bank 246 ITR 206 makes the law very clear::- Under the provisions of the Income-tax Act each head of income is separate and distinct and if certain income…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 4, Guwahati vs. M/S. A. T. C. Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Guwahati

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 169/GTY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati10 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri S.S. Godara, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 169/Gau/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 170/Gau/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2013-14) Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, M/S Atc Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Aayakar Bhwawan, 5Th C/O. Atc Assam Ltd, Kedar Vs. Floor, Christanbasti, G.S. Road, Road, Machkhowa, Guwahati-781005 Guwahati-781001 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी ऱेखा सं./Pan No. Aagca5209A

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sengupta, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate
Section 143Section 22

…by different High-courts in cases such as: Brijnath Brijmohan & Sons Pvt. Ltd. 161 ItR 234 (Bombay) CIT vs. New India Maritime Agencies (P) Ltd. 256 ITR 513 (Madras) Rampur Industries Ltd. vs. CIT 82 ITR 23 (Allahabad) Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. vs. CIT 259 ITR 567 (Kerala) CIT vs. Mithila Properties Publication & Contractor Enterprises (P) Ltd 228 ITR 713 The following observation made by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case CIT vs. Indian Overseas Bank 246 ITR 206 makes the law very clear::- Under the provisions of the Income-tax Act each head of income is separate and distinct and if certain income…

M/S.Oberon Edifices & Estates P. Ltd, Kochi vs. The Pr.CIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 361/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No. 361/Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Oberon Edifices & Estates Vs. The Principal Commissioner Of Pvt. Ltd., Oberon Mall, Income-Tax, Trivandrum. Nh Bye-Pass, Edapally, Kochi-682 024. [Pan:Aaaco 7942E]

Section 263

…ums to be assessed under heads (i) income from house property and (ii) profit and gains of business and profession strictly following the contours set by decision of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 259 ITR 567. B Pass necessary order recomputing income adopting direction in A above. He may call for and verify each lease agreement before making the computation so that items needing assessment under income from house property and sums involved are correctly taken and C In the process of recomputing as directed in B above, the assessee is to be given oppo…

DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S India City Properties Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 1185/KOL/2015[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2017AY 2011-2012
Section 23

…at the facts of the decision of Calcutta High Court are radically different from the appellant’s case. Instead the decision of the Apex Court in the Karnani Properties Ltd. vs CIT (82 ITR 547) and Kerala High Court in Attukal Shopping Complex (P) Ltd. vs CIT (259 ITR 567) are more relevant. In both these cases the landlord had charged separate consideration for rent towards use of property and service charges for rendering services & amenities in a continuous and organized manner to the tenants. In both these decisions the service charges were held to be assessable as business income. I find that both these judgm…

DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S India City Properties Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 1184/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2017AY 2010-2011
Section 23

…at the facts of the decision of Calcutta High Court are radically different from the appellant’s case. Instead the decision of the Apex Court in the Karnani Properties Ltd. vs CIT (82 ITR 547) and Kerala High Court in Attukal Shopping Complex (P) Ltd. vs CIT (259 ITR 567) are more relevant. In both these cases the landlord had charged separate consideration for rent towards use of property and service charges for rendering services & amenities in a continuous and organized manner to the tenants. In both these decisions the service charges were held to be assessable as business income. I find that both these judgm…

DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S India City Properties Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 1183/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2017AY 2009-2010
Section 23

…at the facts of the decision of Calcutta High Court are radically different from the appellant’s case. Instead the decision of the Apex Court in the Karnani Properties Ltd. vs CIT (82 ITR 547) and Kerala High Court in Attukal Shopping Complex (P) Ltd. vs CIT (259 ITR 567) are more relevant. In both these cases the landlord had charged separate consideration for rent towards use of property and service charges for rendering services & amenities in a continuous and organized manner to the tenants. In both these decisions the service charges were held to be assessable as business income. I find that both these judgm…

Keyaram Developers and Hotels P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 2216/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s Keyaram Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, v. 2, Harrington Road, Company Circle – II(4), Chennai - 600 031. Chennai - 600 034. PAN : AABCK 8077 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1095/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 20…

Keyaram Developers and Hotels P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 2215/CHNY/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s Keyaram Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, v. 2, Harrington Road, Company Circle – II(4), Chennai - 600 031. Chennai - 600 034. PAN : AABCK 8077 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1095/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 20…

Keyaram Hotels Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 1095/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s Keyaram Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, v. 2, Harrington Road, Company Circle – II(4), Chennai - 600 031. Chennai - 600 034. PAN : AABCK 8077 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1095/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 20…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Keyaram Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, I.T.A. No.402/Mds/2013 is dismissed

ITA 402/CHNY/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद"य केसम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.402/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2003-04 The Deputy Commissioner of M/s Keyaram Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, v. 2, Harrington Road, Company Circle – II(4), Chennai - 600 031. Chennai - 600 034. PAN : AABCK 8077 D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1095/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 20…

The Commissioner of Inccome Tax-III vs. Speectra Shares AND Scrips Pvt Ltd

ITTA/282/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Attukal Shopping Complex P. Ltd. v. CIT (259 ITR 567) — Cited in 17 Judgments | BharatTax