CIT v. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd.

296 ITR 661High Court2008#791 most cited

What is CIT v. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Income from unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by a builder or developer is assessable as business income, not income from house property, for assessment years prior to the insertion of Section 23(5) of the Income-tax Act.

129

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Neha Builders · 296 ITR 661 · unsold flats · stock in trade · business income · income from house property · section 22 · section 23 · notional rent · builder developer

Sections most often in play

Section 23(5)Section 22Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23Section 24(a)Section 37(1)Section 132

Issues it is cited on

section 23(5)annual letting valuesection 23(4)annual valuesection 23(1)section 24(a)section 211project completion methodsection 43csection 22percentage completion methodsection 35d

Judgments citing CIT v. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd.

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…different view: - In the following cases it has been held that notional annual letting value of unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by the assessee builder cannot be brought to tax under the head 'Income from House property': • CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd. 296 ITR 661 (Guj.) • Shivsagar Builders (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT: [2020] 185 ITD 684 (Delhi - Trib.) • Shree Balaji Ventures v. ITO in ITA No. 1914/Pun/2018 (Pune Trib.) • M/s Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT in ITA Nos. 7288 and 7289/Mum/2017 (Mum - Trib.) • M/s Runwal Constructions v. ACIT in ITA Nos. 5408 and 5409/Mum/2016 (Mum - Trib.) • ITO Vs. Arihant Estates…

Surana Mutha Bhansali, Pune vs. ACIT-Circle 5 Pune, Pune

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

ITA 1442/PUN/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 143(2)Section 270A(1)Section 270A(9)Section 43CSection 80I

…considered as to whether the deemed rent could be imposed on unsold flats which were treated as stock-in-trade. We find that the assessee relied on two decisions of Hon’ble High Courts of Gujarat and Orissa in the cases of Neha Builders (P.) Ltd. reported in 296 ITR 661 (Gujarat) and M.P. Bazaz & Ors. reported in 200 ITR 131 (Orissa), respectively before the AO for the proposition that the income from finished stock of flats is to be computed under the head income from business. The AO rejected the same, but however, placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ansal Housing Fin…

DCIT 14(1)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Neelkanth Urban Developers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2408/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2024AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(5)

…otional rental income in respect of units forming part of the closing stock could not be brought to tax as income from house property by placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Neha Builders (P.) Ltd. : [2008] 296 ITR 661 (Gujarat). It was also contended that there was no provision in Act which specified adoption of rate of 8% (of the value of the closing stock) for computing the notional rental income as proposed by the Assessing Officer. However, the Assessing Officer was not convinced and rejecting the aforesaid contention of the Assessee, the Assessing Officer…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Venus Infrastructure & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 38/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw
Section 80Section 80I

…of his business as that of a developer would loose Us color and character as that of a property simpliciter owned by him. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon"ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Neha Builders (?) Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj). The Hon"ble High Court while disposing off the appeal filed by the revenue in the case of an assessee company which was engaged in the business of construction of property, had observed that where a property is held as stock-in-trade, then the same would become or partake the character of the stock, and any income derived therefrom would b…

The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Venus Infrastructure & Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 37/AHD/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad14 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 37 & 38/Ahd/2021 धििाधरणणवध/Asstt. Years: 2008-09 & 2017-18 D.C.I.T, M/S Venus Infrastructure & Central Circle-1(1), Vs. Developers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad 1101 Venus Amadeus, Jodhpur Cross Road, Ahmedabad-380015. Pan: Aahcs6254J (Applicant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate With Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar & Shri Vijay Govani A.Rs सुिणाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/02/2024 घोवणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 14/02/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Two Appeal Have Been Filed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Ahmedabad, Of Even Dated 20/01/2021 Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed Under S. 147 R.W.S. 143(3) & 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Here- In-After Referred To As "The Act") Relevant To The Assessment Years 2008-09 & 2017-18. First, We Take Up Ita No. 38/Ahd/2021, An Appeal By The Revenue For Ay 2017-18

For Appellant: ShriFor Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadaw
Section 80Section 80I

…of his business as that of a developer would loose Us color and character as that of a property simpliciter owned by him. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon"ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of CIT Vs. Neha Builders (?) Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj). The Hon"ble High Court while disposing off the appeal filed by the revenue in the case of an assessee company which was engaged in the business of construction of property, had observed that where a property is held as stock-in-trade, then the same would become or partake the character of the stock, and any income derived therefrom would b…

Surana Mutha Bhansali Developers, Pune vs. ITO, Ward 5(4), Pune

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1313/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Neelesh KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…considered as to whether the deemed rent could be imposed on unsold flats which were treated as stock- in-trade. We find that the assessee relied on two decisions of Hon’ble High Courts of Gujarat and Orissa in the cases of Neha Builders (P.) Ltd. reported in 296 ITR 661 (Gujarat) and M.P. Bazaz & Ors. reported in 200 ITR 131 (Orissa), respectively before the AO for the proposition that the income from finished stock of flats is to be computed under the head income from business. The AO rejected the same, but however, placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ansal Housing Fin…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-6(1), Mumbai vs. Neepa Real Estates Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1508/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Years: 2017-18 The Deputy Commissioner M/S. Neepa Real Estates Of Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., 12Th Floor, Hallmark Central Circle -6(1), Room No. 1905, Business Plaza, Vs. 19Th Floor, Sang Dnyaneshwar Marg, Air India Building, Near Gurunanak Hospital, Nariman Point, Bandra East, Mumbai- 400 021 Mumbai- 400 051 Pan: Aaacn1884C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 43C

…en one of the objects of the business of the assessee is leasing then rental income is taxed as business income and relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and Hon’ble Supreme Court in cases of CIT vs. Neha Builders (P) Ltd. (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj.) (HC) 5 CO No.56/M/2023 M/s. Neepa Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. and Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC). 8. The Ld. A.R. for the assessee further contended that after considering the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Pvt. Ltd. (supra) the co-ord…

Vijay Kishin Bhatia, Mumbai vs. Office of the Income Tax Officer Ward 14(1)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1274/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalevijay Kishin Bhatia, Vs. Ito, Ward 14(1)(4) 201,Golden Tower, Room No. 203, 2Nd 12Th Road, Khar West, Floor, Aayakar Mumbai-400052. Bhavan, Mk Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan/Gir No. : Agnpb5248C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Manoj Pandit.Ar Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 23.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Manoj Pandit.ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(5)

…ssment years prior to that. Hence, the same cannot be made applicable for the year under consideration. In respect of deemed rental income on unsold stock of flats held as stock in trade, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Neha Builders reported in 296 ITR 661 had categorically held that the said rental income, if any, could be brought to tax only under the head ‘income from business’ and not under the head ‘income from house property’. On perusal of the said decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, we find that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance and Le…

DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1825/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…of the appellant in respect of unsold flats held as stock in trade by the appellant during the year under consideration. For this reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 296 ITR 661 (Guj) is found to be in order. In the said decision, it is held that where the property has been held as stock in trade of the assessee, then the said property C.O. 27/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture would partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from business and no…

DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1824/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…of the appellant in respect of unsold flats held as stock in trade by the appellant during the year under consideration. For this reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 296 ITR 661 (Guj) is found to be in order. In the said decision, it is held that where the property has been held as stock in trade of the assessee, then the said property C.O. 27/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture would partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from business and no…

DCIT Central Circel-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomji Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1349/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…of the appellant in respect of unsold flats held as stock in trade by the appellant during the year under consideration. For this reliance of the Ld. AR on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd., reported in 296 ITR 661 (Guj) is found to be in order. In the said decision, it is held that where the property has been held as stock in trade of the assessee, then the said property C.O. 27/Mum/2023 A.Ys. 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2016-17 Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture would partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from business and no…

M/S Sukhwani Promotors and Builders, Pune vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, (Central), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 301/PUN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.301/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/S.Sukhwani Promoters & The Principal Builders, Vs Commissioner Of Income 208/2A, Near Swaminathan Tax, (Central), Pune. Clinic, Station Road, Pimpri, Pune – 411018. Pan: Abrfs 1253 P Assessee/ Appellant Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Jitendra Jain – Ar Revenue By Shri Sardar Singh Meena – Dr Date Of Hearing 16/05/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central), Pune Dated 24.03.2022 Under Section 263 Of The Act For A.Y.2017-18. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under : “1 & 2. Pcit Erred In Passing The Order U/S 263 Of The Act Which Is Bad In Law, Illegal, Ultra-Virus, In Excess Of And/Or In Want Of Jurisdiction & Otherwise Void. M/S.Sukhwani Promoters & Builders [A]

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 263Section 40

…ers and Builders [A] letting value of unsold flats at the year end is chargeable to tax under the head 'Income from house property'. At the same time, we find that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Neha Builders (P.) Ltd . [2007] 164 Taxman 342/[2008] 296 ITR 661 has held that income from the properties held as stock in trade can be treated as Income from business and not as 'Income from house property'. Our attention has been drawn towards certain Tribunal decisions including Cosmopolis Construction v. ITO [IT Appeal No. 230 & 231 (PUN) of 2018, dated 12-9-2018], wherein, after taking note of both the ab…

Modern Abodes Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12(3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2735/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemodern Abodes Pvt. Ltd., V. Income Tax Officer – 12(3)(4) C/O. Gulabani & Co. Room No. 148, Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 506, 5Th Floor Shree Prasad House 35Th Road, Off. Linking Road Bandra (W), Mumbai - 400050 Pan: Aagcm1595B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Neelam Jadhav Shri Ashish Kumar Deharia Department Represented By :

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 23(1)Section 32Section 37(1)

…ing during year. Case laws: > If property is used as stock-in-trade, then said property would become or partake character of stock and any income derived from stock would be income from businesses and not "income from property".  CIT vs. Neha Builders (2008) 296 ITR 661 (Guj)(HC)(Para 8)  CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013)354 ITR 180 (Del.)(HC)  C.R. Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT, ITA No.4277/Mum/2012 dtd.13/05/2015 Runwal Constructions v. ACIT in ITA. No. 5408 & 5409/Mum/2016 dated 22.02.2018 (Para 10)  Shree Balaji Ventures vs. ITO, ITA No.1914/PUN/2018, de 19/02/2019 (Pune)(Trib.)  IT…

Ravi Developments, Mumbai vs. PCIT(Central), Pune, Mumbai

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

ITA 1136/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Mahaveer JainFor Respondent: Smt. Riddhi Mishra
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 263

…g to the decision of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in DCIT vs Inorbit Malls Private Limited, ITA No. 2220/Mum./2021, submitted that the coordinate bench after noting the difference in facts before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Neha builders, 296 ITR 661 and before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Co Ltd (supra) held that annual letting value on unsold stock is taxable as income from house property. As regards the other 2 issues, the learned DR submitted that no details were called for by the AO during the assessment proceedings and thus the assessment order is er…

Nms Entrprises, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT -27, Mumbai

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

ITA 1103/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadalenms Enterprises Vs. Pr. Cit – 27, Shop No. 1 & 2, Plot Room No. 401, 4Th No. 9, Sector No. 34, Floor, Tower No. 6, Kamothe, Vashi Rly Stn Navi Mumbai-410209 Commercial Complex, Navi Mumbai -400703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahfn9167A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi.Ar Respondent By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade.Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 19.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-27, Mumbai, Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Fallowing Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi.ARFor Respondent: Dr. Mahesh Akhade.CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHIR PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER NMS Enterprises Vs. Pr. CIT – 27, Shop No. 1 & 2, Plot Room No. 401, 4th No. 9, Sector No. 34, Floor, Tower No. 6, Kamothe, Vashi Rly Stn Navi Mumbai-410209 Commercial Complex, Navi Mumbai -400703 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAHFN9167A Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Subodh Ratnaparkhi.AR Respondent by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade.CIT DR Date of Hearing 19.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement 25.01.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The asse…

Prashasti Enterprises, Mumbai vs. PCIT (Central Mumbai, Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1397/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganesh आअसं. 1397/मुं/ 2022 ("न.व. 2017-18) Prashasti Enterprise, 4, Bhoomi Garden, Mahavir Nagar, Kanidvali (W), Mumbai 400 067. Pan: Aabap-2414-R ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central) Mumbai -3, Room No.1901, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant By : Shri Mahavir Jain ""तवाद" "वारा/Respondent By : Shri Jayant Jhaveri सुनवाई क" "त"थ/ Date Of Hearing : 11/10/2022 घोषणा क" "त"थ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2023 आदेश/ Order

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir JainFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri
Section 23Section 263

…vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Company Ltd. (supra) and various other decisions, which inter-alia, includes decision in the case of CIT vs. Gundecha Builders, 102 CCH 426 (Bom), CIT vs. Sane & Doshi Enterprises, 377 ITR 165 (Bom), CIT vs. Neha Builders, 296 ITR 661(Guj) 4 and K. Subramanian, ITO & Another vs. Siemens India Ltd. 156 ITR 11 concluded that the annual letting value of flats held as stock-in-trade cannot be brought to tax under the head “house property”. While taking such view the Tribunal distinguished the decision rendered in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Company Ltd. (s…

Bhagawati Abhilsha Conventure, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1028/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blebhagwati Abhilsha Conventure V. Pr. Cit – Mumbai – 17 A/35, Patil Bhuvan, N.S.B. Road 120, 1St Floor, Kautilya Bhavan Mulund (W), Mumbai - 400080 Avenue-3, Near Videsh Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Pan: Aahfb9198D Bandra(E), Mumbai – 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri M. Subramanian Department Represented By : Dr. Mahesh Akhade

Section 1Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 263Section 43C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Bhagwati Abhilsha Conventure V. Pr. CIT – Mumbai – 17 A/35, Patil Bhuvan, N.S.B. Road 120, 1st Floor, Kautilya Bhavan Mulund (W), Mumbai - 400080 Avenue-3, Near Videsh Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex PAN: AAHFB9198D Bandra(E), Mumbai – 400051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri M. Subramanian Department Represented by : Dr. Mahesh Akhade Date of Hearing : 20.10.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 05.01.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM…

Mora] Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 155/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

…f Section 23(1) and 24 of the Act. c. Kind attention is once again invited to the following decisions where it has been held that the provisions of Section 22 did not apply to the cases of stock-in-trade held by a builder/developer (i). Neha Builder (P) Ltd., 296 ITR 661 (guj.) (ii). Shyam Burlap Company Ltd. 31 taxmann.com 121 (Cal.) (A.Ys: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) MorajFinanz Corporation (iii). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.755/M/2016 dated 10.10.2018 (iv). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.3321/M/2016 dated 31.08.2018 (v). C.R.Development (P.)Ltd., ITA No.4277/M/2012 dated 13.05.20…

Moraj Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. Dclt Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 154/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

…f Section 23(1) and 24 of the Act. c. Kind attention is once again invited to the following decisions where it has been held that the provisions of Section 22 did not apply to the cases of stock-in-trade held by a builder/developer (i). Neha Builder (P) Ltd., 296 ITR 661 (guj.) (ii). Shyam Burlap Company Ltd. 31 taxmann.com 121 (Cal.) (A.Ys: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) MorajFinanz Corporation (iii). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.755/M/2016 dated 10.10.2018 (iv). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.3321/M/2016 dated 31.08.2018 (v). C.R.Development (P.)Ltd., ITA No.4277/M/2012 dated 13.05.20…

Moraj Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 153/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

…f Section 23(1) and 24 of the Act. c. Kind attention is once again invited to the following decisions where it has been held that the provisions of Section 22 did not apply to the cases of stock-in-trade held by a builder/developer (i). Neha Builder (P) Ltd., 296 ITR 661 (guj.) (ii). Shyam Burlap Company Ltd. 31 taxmann.com 121 (Cal.) (A.Ys: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) MorajFinanz Corporation (iii). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.755/M/2016 dated 10.10.2018 (iv). Howrey Engineers & Builders (P) Ltd., ITA No.3321/M/2016 dated 31.08.2018 (v). C.R.Development (P.)Ltd., ITA No.4277/M/2012 dated 13.05.20…