How many judgments cite Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT?

381 judgments on BharatTax cite Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT (373 ITR 673), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 1961, Section 14A, Section 22, Section 24, Section 23.

Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT

373 ITR 673Supreme Court of India2015#195 most cited

What is Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Income from immovable property, such as unsold flats or shops, held by an assessee as stock-in-trade in their business of acquiring and holding properties is taxable as 'business income' and not 'income from house property'. Consequently, notional annual letting value under Section 23 cannot be attributed to such stock-in-trade.

381

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT · Section 22 · Section 23 · business income · house property income · stock-in-trade · unsold flats · annual letting value · ALV · property developer

Also reported as

56 Taxmann.com 456

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 1961 Section 14A Section 22 Section 24 Section 23 Section 263 Section 32

Issues it is cited on

annual letting value section 23(1)annual value house property income section 35d section 22 put to use section 45 section 35 profits and gains of business or profession section 32 revenue expenditure

Judgments citing Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT

Cache Properties Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 571/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Respondent: Smt. Neeju Gupta, DR

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 24

…s engaged in the business of leasing out its house properties to earn rent, income so earned should be treated as ‘business income’ and not as ‘income from house property’; :- 12 -: ITA. No. 571/Hyd/2018 ii. Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd., Vs. CIT [373 ITR 673] (SC), wherein it was held that – in terms of MOA, main object of the assessee-company was to acquire properties and earn income by letting out of the same, said income was to be brought to tax as business income and not as income from house property; 6.1. Ld.DR also submitted that assessee’s reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 13(1)(1), Mumbai vs. United White Metal Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5166/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5166/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Acit-13(1)(1) M/S. United White Metal Ltd. 2Nd Floor, Room No.218 Beyond Mahindra & Mahindra Gate बनाम नाम नाम/ नाम Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road No.4, White City Compound Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Akurli Road, Kandivali (E) Mumbai-400 101. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacu-0983-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (ू"यथ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Vajani-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Choudhary Arun Kumar Singh -Ld.DR

…ome under the head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession" instead of "Income from House Property" as considered by the AO without appreciating that the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs CIT(2015) 373 ITR 673(SC) is not applicable to the facts of the assessee as the assessee is in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.” 2. The Ld. Authorized Representative for assessee [AR], at the outset, submitted that identical…

Haware Infotech Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 281/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos.281 & 291/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Haware Infotech Ltd. Acit- Central Circle-4(2) 413/416 Vardhaman Market Air India Building, 19Th Floor, Sector 17, Dbc, Vashi, Vs. Nariman Point, Navi Mumbai – 400 705 Mumbai – 400 021

For Appellant: Shri Ruturaj H. Gurjar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…s. ACIT, CC-4(2) by the Hon‟ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Neha Builders Pvt. ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj), and further relying on the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 377 ITR 673 (SC), had observed, that the income generated by an assessee who was engaged in the business of acquiring and holding properties from such source would be its „business income‟ and not its income under the head „house property‟. Also, we find that the Tribunal while disposing off the appeal in the case of the „sister concern‟ of the assessee in H…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Ptl Enterprises Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 162/COCH/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Alok MitraFor Respondent: Sri.Abraham Joseph Markose

Section 56(2)(ii)

…ness as per Memorandum of Association such income should be assessed as business income and not house property. In arriving at the above conclusion, the Hon’ble Apex Court followed the judgment dated 9.4.2015 of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. vs. CIT 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein it was held that if an assessee is having a ITA No.160-162/Coch/2017 13 M/s.PTL Enterprises Limited. house property and by way of business it is giving property on rent and if it is receiving rent from the said property as its business income, the said income, even if in the nature of rent, should be treated as “Business Income” bec…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Ptl Enterprises Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 161/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Alok MitraFor Respondent: Sri.Abraham Joseph Markose

Section 56(2)(ii)

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Ptl Enterprises Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 160/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin06 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.Alok MitraFor Respondent: Sri.Abraham Joseph Markose

Section 56(2)(ii)

M/S. Kolte Patil Developers Ltd., Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2206/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22Section 23(1)

…nnot be termed as “income from house property”. We further find that the Co-ordinate Ltd., Vs. CIT in ITA No.4277/2012 order dt.13.05.2015, after considering the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investment Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) has held that on the flats which were unsold, which were neither given on rent nor the assessee had intention to let out the flats, no deemed rental income could be considered in assessee’s hands. We further find that the Co-ordinate Bench of Pune Tribunal in the case of M/s. Cosmopolis Construction (in ITA Nos.230 and 231/PUN/2018 dt.12…

Tash Investments Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for AY 2011-12 is allowed

ITA 1158/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasad

For Respondent: Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. DR

…of the company is to acquire shares and earn income therefrom, the income received thereon is liable to be taxed as ‘business income’ in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC). Therefore, where the pre-dominant object of the assessee is to buy, invest or acquire and hold shares etc. intention of the assessee would ordinarily be to enjoy profits in the course of business from this activity. Moving further, it is the case of the assessee that in order to attain its pre-dominant objects, the assessee company has entr…

Vijay Enterprises, Mumbai vs. DCIT 30(3), Mumbai

In the result the ground No

ITA 5550/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am

Section 143(3)Section 23

…dering the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (supra) which the AO relied upon and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 373 ITR 673, held that unsold flats which are in stock in trade should be assessed under the head 'business income' and there is no justification in estimating rental income from those flats and notionally computing annual letting value under Section 23 of the Act. While holding so the Coordinate Bench observed as under: - "3. The ld. AR placed the order of…

DCIT Cir 6(2)(1), Mumbai vs. City Centre Mall Nashik P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue are hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 745/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.745 & 746 /Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) बिधम/ Acit Cir 6(2)(1) M/S. City Centre Mall Nashik Pvt. Ltd. 5Th R. No. 504, Floor, Vs. Room No.62, Plot No. 8-9, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Parekh Mahal, Lady Road, Mumbai-400020. Jamshedji Road, Sakharam Keer Marg, Mahim, Mumbai-400016. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccc6422B (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Revenue By: Shri Abi Rama Kartikiyen Assessee By: Shri Rajendra Daga/ Abdul Gani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06.03.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 24/04/019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Above Mentioned Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 23.11.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2013-14 & 2014-15. Ita. No.745/M/2018:- 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 23.11.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-12

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Daga/ Abdul GaniFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikiyen

Section 2Section 24Section 36(1)(iii)

…TA No.4891/Mum/2008). The Hon'ble Tribunal also considered the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Royala Corporation Pvt. Ltd. (Civil appeal No.6437 of 2016 dated 11.08.2016) and Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015) 373 ITR 673. The relevant paragraph in the order of the Hon'ble ITAT is extracted as under: 11. In view of the foregoing, we are of the view that there is merit in the contentions of the assessee that the impugned income should b assessed as business income. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to assess th…

Kanakia Spaces Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Central Circle 4(1), Mumbai

In the result the grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are allowed for

ITA 7288/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta with Shri Govind Javeri (AR)For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar Rai ( Sr. DR)

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…utmost regard to the decision of Delhi High Court in case in Ansal Housing Financing & Leasing Co. Ltd. (supra), we are accepting the view taken by Gujarat High Court in CIT vs. Neha Builders (supra). 7. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Chennai Property (373 ITR 673) held that when the company is primarily engaged in business of construction and development, which is the main object of the assessee, 11 ITA No. 7288, 7289 Mum 17 & 209 and 210 Mum 18-M/s Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. the income derived by assessee would be “Income from Business”. On the same analogy in the case in hand, the assessee is engaged i…

M/S.3Nn Corporation, Mumbai vs. Pr.CIT-27, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2637/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar (CIT DR)

Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 263

…ing the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (supra) which the AO relied upon and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments 8 Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 373 ITR 673, held that unsold flats which are in stock in trade should be assessed under the head ‘business income’ and there is no justification in estimating rental income from those flats and notionally computing annual letting value under Section 23 of the Act. While holding so the Coordinate Bench observed as under: - 3. The ld. AR placed the order of…

Asiatic Stores & Soda Fountain, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6757/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘ए’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI Before Shri MAHAVIR SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member ITA Nos.6757/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Asiatic Stores & Soda Fountain ITO-17(1)(2), 73, Industrial Assurance 1st Floor, Room No.116, बनाम/ Building, Veer Nariman Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Churchgate, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAAFA8467D "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Sanjay Kapadia राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Ms. Harkam…

Roxy Theatres P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 5206/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya S. Anjaria

Section 143(3)

…2, 10.09.2013 and 10.09.2014 for A.Ys. 2009-10 to 2011-12 restoring the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer and to examine the issue in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd., v. CIT [373 ITR 673]. Therefore, since the Tribunal set aside the appeals for the A.Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011- 12 to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining the issue in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd., v. CIT (supra), the consequential orders passed by the Assessing Officer givi…

Roxy Theatres P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 5205/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya S. Anjaria

Section 143(3)

Roxy Theatres P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals for the A

ITA 5204/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep SharmaFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya S. Anjaria

Section 143(3)

Makewaves Sea Resort Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 are allowed

ITA 36/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Makewaves Sea Resort Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Construction House, ‘B’, 2Nd Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle – 4(1), 623, Linking Road, Khar (W), 19Th Floor, Air India Bldg., Mumbai - 400052 Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacm0673J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjay B. Sawant (Ar) Revenue By : Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 13/02/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/03/2019

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay B. Sawant (AR)For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari (DR)

Section 143

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Makewaves Sea Resort Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner of Construction House, ‘B’, 2nd Floor, Income Tax, Central Circle – 4(1), 623, Linking Road, Khar (W), 19th Floor, Air India Bldg., Mumbai - 400052 Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 PAN: AAACM0673J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanjay B. Sawant (AR) Revenue by : Shri D.G. Pansari (DR) Date of Hearing: 13/02/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 20/03/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL N…

Commissioner of Income Tax VIII vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 742 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019

Section 260

…ir respective cases. A careful perusal of the said judgment shows that the point in fact is answered in favour of the Assessee and not against it. 51.1 Ms. Malhotra sought to rely on the decision in Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) as supporting the case of the Revenue. However, this Court is not able to agree with the above submission. In the said case, the object of the Appellant Assessee company 2019:DHC:1682-DB ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 24 of 36 was to acquire and let out properties in the city. The re…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 548 / 2010HC Delhi20 Mar 2019

Section 260

…ir respective cases. A careful perusal of the said judgment shows that the point in fact is answered in favour of the Assessee and not against it. 51.1 Ms. Malhotra sought to rely on the decision in Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) as supporting the case of the Revenue. However, this Court is not able to agree with the above submission. In the said case, the object of the Appellant Assessee company 2019:DHC:1676-DB ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 24 of 36 was to acquire and let out properties in the city. The re…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Gopal Dass Estates & Housing Pvt.Ltd

Appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA - 400 / 2009HC Delhi20 Mar 2019

Section 260

…ir respective cases. A careful perusal of the said judgment shows that the point in fact is answered in favour of the Assessee and not against it. 51.1 Ms. Malhotra sought to rely on the decision in Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) as supporting the case of the Revenue. However, this Court is not able to agree with the above submission. In the said case, the object of the Appellant Assessee company 2019:DHC:1677-DB ITA 210/2003 & connected matters Page 24 of 36 was to acquire and let out properties in the city. The re…