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 1961Section 14ASection 22Section 24Section 23Section 263Section 32

Issues it is cited on

annual letting valuesection 23(1)annual valuehouse property incomesection 35dsection 22put to usesection 45section 35profits and gains of business or professionsection 32revenue expenditure

Judgments citing Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT

I.T.O WD - 56(2), Kolkata vs. Salarpuria Soft Zone, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 813/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Jhajahria, CAFor Respondent: Shri: Niraj Kumar, CIT-Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…rcumstances, the assessee claimed the rental receipts from the occupants of the Industrial park as business income. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein it is held as under: M/s Salarpuria Softzone, AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid issue. Before we narrate the legal principle that needs to be applied to give the answer to the aforesaid question, we would like to recapitulate some seminal features of the present case. 5. The…

M/S Salarpuria Soft Zone, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 666/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Jhajahria, CAFor Respondent: Shri: Niraj Kumar, CIT-Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…rcumstances, the assessee claimed the rental receipts from the occupants of the Industrial park as business income. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein it is held as under: M/s Salarpuria Softzone, AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid issue. Before we narrate the legal principle that needs to be applied to give the answer to the aforesaid question, we would like to recapitulate some seminal features of the present case. 5. The…

M/S Salarpuria Soft Zone, Kolkata vs. J.C.I.T RG - 56, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 665/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Jhajahria, CAFor Respondent: Shri: Niraj Kumar, CIT-Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…rcumstances, the assessee claimed the rental receipts from the occupants of the Industrial park as business income. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein it is held as under: M/s Salarpuria Softzone, AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid issue. Before we narrate the legal principle that needs to be applied to give the answer to the aforesaid question, we would like to recapitulate some seminal features of the present case. 5. The…

I.T.O WD - 56(2), Kolkata vs. Salarpuria Soft Zone, Kolkata

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 581/KOL/2013[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Wasim Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Jhajahria, CAFor Respondent: Shri: Niraj Kumar, CIT-Dr
Section 143(3)Section 80I

…rcumstances, the assessee claimed the rental receipts from the occupants of the Industrial park as business income. We find that this issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein it is held as under: M/s Salarpuria Softzone, AY 2008-09 & 2009-10 “4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid issue. Before we narrate the legal principle that needs to be applied to give the answer to the aforesaid question, we would like to recapitulate some seminal features of the present case. 5. The…

ITO 8(2)(3), Mumbai vs. Nistha Mall Management Co. P . Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2743/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Sanjay Arora, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2743/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Ito-8(2)(3), Nishta Mall Management Co. Pvt. Room No. 213, 2Nd Floor, Ltd. बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar, Mumbai-400 020 Off. Jogeshwari, Vikhroli Link Vs. Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai-400 060 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaecm 0705 H (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Randhir Gupta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Nishit Gandhi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 24.2.2016 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 29.2.2016 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Sanjay Arora, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 14.1.2013, Allowing The Assessee’S Appeal Contesting Its Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2009-10 Vide Order Dated 30.11.2011. 2. The Principal Issue Arising In This Appeal, Agitated Per Its’ First Four Grounds, Is In Respect Of The Head Of Income Under Which The Rental Income For Allowing The User

For Appellant: Shri Randhir GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Nishit Gandhi
Section 143(3)Section 56

…ered by the decision by the Tribunal in its’ own case for A.Y. 2006-07 (in ITA No. 5882/Mum/2010 dated 30/10/2015), adducing a copy thereof. The tribunal, following the decision by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC), has allowed the assessee’s claim. There is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case, so that the said decision would have clear application for the current year as well. 3. We have perused the said order by the tribunal, wherein, it, examining the nature of the income as well as the judicial authority on the subject, has decide…

The Commissioner of Income Tax IV vs. M/s. Maheshwari Plaza Resorts (P) Ltd

ITTA/281/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax I vs. M/S Alloy Nitrides Limited

ITTA/297/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) vs. Sri R.Gowsreesham

ITTA/296/2011HC Telangana29 Feb 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Shree Guru Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, WD-10(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed as indicated above

ITA 1081/KOL/2015[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap

Section 143(3)Section 150Section 24

…I.T.A. No. 1081/KOL./2015 Assessment year: 2008-2009 Page 1 of 6 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member I.T.A. No. 1081/KOL/ 2015 Assessment Year: 2008-2009 Shree Guru Realtors Pvt. Limited,.........................................Appellant Flat-8E, Floor Castle, Lake District, 74, Narkeldanga Main Road, Kolkata-700 054 [PAN : AAKCS 2052 H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,...............................................................Respondent Ward-10(1), Kolkata, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700 069 Appearances by: Miss Va…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S D.R.S. Warehousing (North) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4354/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Ms. Suchitra Kamblei.T.A .No.-4354/Del/2012 (Assessment Year-2009-10)

Section 24Section 36Section 36(1)(ii)

…erefore, the assessee rightly disclosed the income under the head Income from Business. The Ld. AR relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central – III, Tamil Nadu [373 ITR 673 (SC)] wherein the same factual position was highlighted. 9. The Ld. AR further submitted that as relates to Ground No. 2, 3 & 4, the CIT (A) has taken into account additional evidence without giving opportunity to the Assessing Officer and submitted before us that the same may be remanded back for adjudication before the Assessing Officer. The L…

Garden View Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. I.T.O. 3(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 2544/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2544/Mum/2012 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2004-05) M/S Garden View Realtors बिधम/ Income Tax Officer 3(1)(4), Room No.666, 6Th Floor, Pvt.Ltd., Vs. 161-C Mittal Towers, Aayakar Bhavan, Nariman Point, M K Road, Mumbai-400021 Mumbai-400020 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacg1917F (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीऱाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Narayan Atal प्रत्यथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Smt.Anu K Aggarwal सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing :3.12.2015 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement :3.12.2015 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran,Am: The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 07.12.2011 Passed By Ld Cit(A) For Assessment Year 2004-05 Dismissing The Appeal Filed By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Narayan AtalFor Respondent: Smt.Anu K Aggarwal
Section 143(1)

…reasons. The Ld Counsel submitted that the assessee’s objects included letting out of properties on commercial basis and hence, in view of the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd Vs. CIT (2015)(373 ITR 673), the decision rendered by the tax authorities are not correct. 3. When it was proposed by the bench that these matters may be set aside to the file of the assessing officer for examining all the issues afresh in the light of the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd (supra), both the pa…

Damask Projects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT 6, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2775/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.6216/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.2775/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. Damsak Projects Pvt. The Dy.Comm. Of Income Tax, बनाम/ Ltd. Range 6(2), Vs. 167, Ready Money Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Raod, Terrace, Dr. Annie Besaant Mumbai 400 020 Road, Worli Naka, Mumbai 400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccd 5994P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Firoz Andhyarujina ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri A.K.Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Firoz AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Srivastava

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.6216/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.2775/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 M/s. Damsak Projects Pvt. The Dy.Comm. of Income Tax, बनाम/ Ltd. Range 6(2), Vs. 167, Ready Money Aaykar Bhavan, MK Raod, Terrace, Dr. Annie Besaant Mumbai 400 020 Road, Worli Naka, Mumbai 400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. :AACCD 5994P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" /…

Damask Projects P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 6(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6216/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.6216/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No.2775/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 M/S. Damsak Projects Pvt. The Dy.Comm. Of Income Tax, बनाम/ Ltd. Range 6(2), Vs. 167, Ready Money Aaykar Bhavan, Mk Raod, Terrace, Dr. Annie Besaant Mumbai 400 020 Road, Worli Naka, Mumbai 400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. :Aaccd 5994P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: Shri Firoz Andhyarujina ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri A.K.Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Firoz AndhyarujinaFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Srivastava

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ , मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.6216/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2008-09 आयकर अपील सं/ I.TA No.2775/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2009-10 M/s. Damsak Projects Pvt. The Dy.Comm. of Income Tax, बनाम/ Ltd. Range 6(2), Vs. 167, Ready Money Aaykar Bhavan, MK Raod, Terrace, Dr. Annie Besaant Mumbai 400 020 Road, Worli Naka, Mumbai 400 018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. :AACCD 5994P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" /…

ITO 8(2)-4, Mumbai vs. Nisha Mall Management Co. P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5882/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2015AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri R.C.Sharma, Am आमकय अऩीर सिं./Ita No.5882/Mum/2010 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2006-2007) Ito-8(2)(4), Mumbai Vs. M/S Nishta Mall Management Co. Pvt. Ltd., Knowledge House, Shyam Nagar, Off. Jogeshwari-Vikhroli Link Road, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai-400060 स्थामी रेखा सिं./ जीआइआय सिं./ Pan/Gir No. : Aaecm 0705 H (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. याजस्र् की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M. Rajan यनधावरयती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Nishit Gandhi सुनर्ाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 5Th August, 2015 घोषणा की तायीख/Date Of Pronouncement 30-10-2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per R.C.Sharma, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of Cit(A), Mumbai, Dated 13-4-2010, For The Assessment Year 2006-07, In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S.143(3) Of The I.T.Act, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Revenue :- “On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding That Business Centre Service Charges Of Rs.52,89,000/- Should Be Treated As “Business Income” Instead Of “Income From House Property” Without Appreciating The Facts Of The Case.”

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan
Section 143(3)

…ing any positive material on record. Accordingly, we do not find any merit to interfere in the order of CIT(A). We further found that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd., 373 ITR 673 in favour of the 4 assessee for holding that such commercial exploitation renders income from business rather than income from house property. 6. In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 30/10/2015. आदेश की घोषणा खुरे न्मामारम भें ददनािंकः 30 /10/2015 को की गई । (जोगगन्दय ससिंह) (आय.सी.शभाव)…

M/S.Hastalloy India Ltd vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax/Vizag

ITTA/22/2000HC Telangana16 Aug 2012

Bench: GODA RAGHURAM,M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO

…s by the assessee are dismissed.” Mr. Ray, learned counsel for the appellant relies on the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, reported -6- in [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC) wherein in paragraphs-8 & 9, it has been held as under: “8. Before we refer to the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Sultan Brothers (P) Ltd., we would be well advised to discuss the law laid down authoritatively and succinctly by this court in Karanpura Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1962] 44 ITR 362 (SC). That was als…

The Commissioner of Income Tax -IV vs. M/s. Meghadoot Drillers

ITTA/295/2011HC Telangana22 Nov 2011

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/414/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/417/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/415/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR

Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. Agricultural Market Committee

ITTA/418/2011HC Telangana17 Nov 2011

Bench: V.V.S.RAO,SANJAY KUMAR