CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.

249 ITR 47High Court2001#2022 most cited

What is CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Income from letting out immovable property, even with ancillary services, is taxable as 'Income from House Property' if the dominant intention is to exploit the property itself, not to run a complex business providing integrated services. The classification depends on the assessee's primary object in exploiting the property.

57

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,416 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. · 249 ITR 47 · Section 22 · Income from House Property · Business income · Dominant intention · Primary object · Exploitation of property · Letting out property with services · Rental income vs business income · Ancillary facilities · 263 ITR 143

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 27Section 56(2)(iii)Section 10Section 115JAASection 115JBSection 12

Issues it is cited on

section 35ddasection 36(1)(ii)annual valuerule of consistencysection 3(1)employees contribution to pfdisallowance of interest expendituresection 22section 36(1)(iii)book profitssection 56(2)disallowance under section 14a

Judgments citing CIT v. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd.

Falcon Vincon Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Pr.CIT-3, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1159/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am Falcon Vincon Private Limited Vs. Pr. Cit-3, Kolkata 102, Tower No.12, Shriram Sameeksha, New Gangamma Gudi Police Station Road, Naidu Layout, Bengaluru "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcf3203C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, FCAFor Respondent: Dr. P. K. Srihari, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(3)

…renting of property. The Assessee Company has purchased the property with the intention of letting it out and to earn rental income from the same. (iii) We refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shambhu lnvestment (P) Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47 (Cal) wherein the Hon’ble High Court held that where the prime object of the assessee was to let out portion of property to various occupants by giving them additional right of using furniture and fixtures and other common facilities for which rent was being paid month by month in addition to the security free advance covering the entire cost of t…

Nimesh Dhiraj Lal Vora, Mumbai vs. ACIT, WD- 17 (2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4989/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (A.M.) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm) Nimesh Dhirajlal Vora Vs Acit, Wd.17(2), Flat No.26, 6Th Floor, Room No. 123A, Neemchhaya Joshi Lane Aayakar Bhawan, Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai- Maharshi, Karve Road, 400 077 Mumbai-400020 Pan : Aacpv5956C Appellant Respondednt

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…out of the property and provision of the aforesaid services being interdependent, intertwined and inseparable, form part of one letting by the assessee. We find that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Sambhu Investments Pvt. ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Cal), had observed that where the prime object of the assessee was to let out the portion of the property to various occupants by giving them additional right of using the furniture & fixtures and other common facilities for which rent was being paid, the income derived therefrom would be assessable under the head “house property”. The aforesaid…

Shibani S. Bhojwani, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 3(4), Mumbai

ITA 1525/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Yogesh A. Thar, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…Hon’ble Apex Court was further deliberated upon by the court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 143 (SC), while upholding the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Cal), wherein laying down the parameters for adjudicating as to whether the income derived by an assessee from letting out of furnished premises was liable to be assessed under the head ‘Income from house property’ or as ‘business income’, it was held as under:- 7. Taking a sum total of the aforesaid decisions if clearly appears that merely beca…

Devbhumi Estates (Mumbai) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 649/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sooddevbhumi Estates Pvt. Ltd. The Deputy Commissioner Of 43, 4Th Floor, Ajaydeep Building, Income Tax, Cirlce-2(1)(1), 240 Perin Nariman Street, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai 400001 Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle Hariya &For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 24

…out of the property and provision of the aforesaid services being interdependent, intertwined and inseparable, form part of one letting by the assessee. We find that the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of CIT Vs. Sambhu Investments Pvt. ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Cal), had observed that where the prime object of the assessee was to let out the portion of the property to various occupants by giving them additional right of using the furniture & fixtures and other common facilities for which rent was being paid, the income derived therefrom would be assessable under the head “house property”. The aforesaid…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. United Info Planet Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2608/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 194Section 194CSection 24BSection 57

…tted that the assessee failed to submit the details of fixtures as stated to be as annexure 1 to the Fit Out Hire Agreement dated 18/1/2008. The Ld. DR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of CIT Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 as well as Kerala High Court decision 177 Taxman 478. The Ld. DR relied upon the Tribunal decision in case of Suguna Kapoor Vs. ACIT, ITA No. 4117/Del/2012 order dated 10/10/2012 wherein it is stated that entire amount received by the assessee on account of two separate agreement is to be treated as income from house property. 6. The Ld. AR relie…

ACIT - 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. E-City Projects Construction Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4988/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri R. Manjandtha SwamyFor Respondent: 22.11.2018
Section 143(3)Section 24

…’ble Tribunal in ITA No. 8390, 1435 & 1230/Mum/2010, 2012 & 2013 respectively. After considering the arguments of both sides, the Hon’ble Tribunal has held as under: "As held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt Ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47(Cal) which has being subsequently affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, what has to be seen in this context is what is the primary object of the assessee while exploiting the property. If it is found applying such test that the main intention is to let out the property or any portion thereof, the same must be considered as income from house prope…

DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S National Engineering Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1791/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Dec 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A.T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 92C

…t was as under: “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Tribunal is justified in law in holding service charge received as business income instead of House Property without considering the decision of the latest judgment reported in 249 ITR 47 (Cal)” 6. We note that the aforesaid grounds raised by the Revenue before the Hon’ble High Court has been dismissed and the Tribunal’s order to treat the service charges as business income instead from house property has been upheld. We note that the order of the Tribunal has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order and also the Ld. C…

DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S National Engineering Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

ITA 987/KOL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Mondal, JCIT(Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Asim Choudhury, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…on plant and machinery used in Barakhamba Road property for rendering services was disallowed in computing the ‘business income’. The ld AO relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Shambhu investment Pvt. Ltd's case reported in 249 ITR 47, wherein it was held that when rendering services are integral part of the tenancy agreement, it becomes part of income from house property. Therefore, on the same basis the service charges income of Rs.2,40,28,343/-was added to the rental annual value under section 23 of the Act in assessing the house property income. The 30% deduction on such se…

DCIT, Circle-6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S National Engineering Industries Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue(in ITA No

ITA 986/KOL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.986 & 987/Kol/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12& 2012-13) D.C.I.T, Circle-6(1), Vs. M/S. National Engineering

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Mondal, JCIT(Sr. DR)For Respondent: Shri Asim Choudhury, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 92C

…on plant and machinery used in Barakhamba Road property for rendering services was disallowed in computing the ‘business income’. The ld AO relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Shambhu investment Pvt. Ltd's case reported in 249 ITR 47, wherein it was held that when rendering services are integral part of the tenancy agreement, it becomes part of income from house property. Therefore, on the same basis the service charges income of Rs.2,40,28,343/-was added to the rental annual value under section 23 of the Act in assessing the house property income. The 30% deduction on such se…

Addl CIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Trent Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1727/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Trent Ltd., Additional CIT, Bombay House, Range – 2(3), 2nd Floor, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 DCIT-2(3), M/s. Trent Ltd., R.No.555, Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.R. Revenu…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1163/MUM/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin, D.R
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2006-07 M/s. Trent Ltd., Additional CIT, Bombay House, Range – 2(3), 2nd Floor, 24, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Homy Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 DCIT-2(3), M/s. Trent Ltd., R.No.555, Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai Homi Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL 1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.R. Revenu…

Saidarshan Business Centres P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6376/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhm/S Saidarshan Business Acit -8(1)(2), Centres Pvt. Ltd., 405-408, Mumbai. Navbharat Estate, B-Wing, Vs. Zakaria Bunder Road, Sewri(W), Mumbai-400015. Pan: Aaacs5801J Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (Ar) Respondent By : Ms. Arju Garodia (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 19.06.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2018 Orderunder Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh;

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia (DR)
Section 254(1)

…n elaborated at page 2 & 3 of the appellant order. However, in the a.y. 2003-04, the Tribunal after detailed discussion and following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2001) 249 ITR 47 which later on was a decision, various expenses have been disallowed in the manner provided by Tribunal. In this year, the case of the Ld. Counsel before us is that, in the light of the latest Supreme Court decisions, the earlier precedence 4 ITA No. 6376Mum 16- M/s Saidarshan Business Centres Pvt. Ltd. should not be followed because, now the l…

Tulsi Shipping P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed

ITA 273/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

Section 143(3)

…condly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) is rendered in the background of its own facts as they were emerging from the order of the Hon'ble High Court reported in CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd., 249 ITR 47 (Kolkata). In fact, a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra) would reveal that the Hon‟ble Court clearly negated that merely because the income is attached to any immoveable property, that cannot be the sole factor for assessment of such income as „income from house property‟.…

Tulsi Shipping P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed, as above

ITA 5558/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri C.N. Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Aasifa KhanFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 147

…condly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) is rendered in the background of its own facts as they were emerging from the order of the Hon'ble High Court reported in CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd., 249 ITR 47 (Kolkata). In fact, a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra) would reveal that the Hon’ble Court 9 M/s. Tulsi Shipping Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 5708/Mum/2015 & 5558/Mum/2016 clearly negated that merely because the income is attached to any immoveable property, that cannot be the so…

Tulsi Shipping P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed, as above

ITA 5708/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri C.N. Prasad

For Appellant: Ms. Aasifa KhanFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 147

…condly, the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) is rendered in the background of its own facts as they were emerging from the order of the Hon'ble High Court reported in CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd., 249 ITR 47 (Kolkata). In fact, a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (supra) would reveal that the Hon’ble Court 9 M/s. Tulsi Shipping Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 5708/Mum/2015 & 5558/Mum/2016 clearly negated that merely because the income is attached to any immoveable property, that cannot be the so…

Saidarshan Business Centres P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 7(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby ordered to be partly allowed

ITA 1773/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P. K. Bansal, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकरअपीलसं/I.T.A. No.1773/M/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) M/S. Saidarshan Business बिधम/ Acit-7(2) Centres Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Mumbai 405-408, Navbharat Estate, B-Wing, Zakaria Bunder Road, Sewri (W) Mumbai- 400015 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacs5801J .. (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी /Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (AR)For Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 234B

…n elaborated at page 2 & 3 of the appellant order. However, in the a.y. 2003-04, the Tribunal after detailed discussion and following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2001) 249 ITR 47 which later on was a decision, various expenses have been disallowed in the manner provided by Tribunal. In this year, the case of the Ld. Counsel before us is that, in the light of the latest Supreme Court decisions, the earlier precedence should not be followed because, now the law as has been culled out from these Apex court decisions are that,…

M/S Scrips N Scroll (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1262/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pardeep Kumar, JCIT (D.R)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH ‘ C ’ BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. A. No.1262/Bang/2016 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) M/s. Scrips N Scroll (India) Pvt. Ltd., No.100/2, Anchorage – 2, Richmond Road, Bangalore-560 025. …. Appellant. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(3), Bangalore. ….. Respondent. Appellant By : Shri C. Ramesh, C.A. Respondent By : Shri Pardeep Kumar, JCIT (D.R) Date of Hearing : 20.11.2017. Date of Pronouncement : 13.12.2017. O R D E R Per Shri Jason P Boaz, A.M. : This appeal by the assessee is…

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

…art of rental income and it, therefore, could not be said that the assessee was carrying on the business of rendering services. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 and held that the service charges received by the assessee were chargeable to tax in its hand under the head “income from house property”. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for business loss was disallowed by him and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, net income of Rs. 22,83,278/- on account of service charges was brought to tax by him…

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

…art of rental income and it, therefore, could not be said that the assessee was carrying on the business of rendering services. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 and held that the service charges received by the assessee were chargeable to tax in its hand under the head “income from house property”. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for business loss was disallowed by him and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, net income of Rs. 22,83,278/- on account of service charges was brought to tax by him…

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

…art of rental income and it, therefore, could not be said that the assessee was carrying on the business of rendering services. In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Kolkata High Court in the case of CIT vs Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. 249 ITR 47 and held that the service charges received by the assessee were chargeable to tax in its hand under the head “income from house property”. Accordingly, the claim of the assessee for business loss was disallowed by him and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, net income of Rs. 22,83,278/- on account of service charges was brought to tax by him…