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.

A.B. Hotels Ltd. (Radisson Hotel), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4011/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 24

…ty or as a business income is as to what is the primary object of the assesse, rather than whether the assessee is letting out the property as part of its main business, As held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd [249 ITR 47], which has been approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (263 ITR 143], "If It is found applying such test that the main intention is for letting out the property or any portion thereof the same must be considered as rental income or income from property" anti "in case it is found that the main intention…

A.B. Hotels Ltd. (Radisson Hotel), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4010/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 24

…ty or as a business income is as to what is the primary object of the assesse, rather than whether the assessee is letting out the property as part of its main business, As held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd [249 ITR 47], which has been approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (263 ITR 143], "If It is found applying such test that the main intention is for letting out the property or any portion thereof the same must be considered as rental income or income from property" anti "in case it is found that the main intention…

A.B. Hotels Ltd. (Radisson Hotel), New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the above three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 4009/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Malhotra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. R.C.Danday, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 24

…ty or as a business income is as to what is the primary object of the assesse, rather than whether the assessee is letting out the property as part of its main business, As held by Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd [249 ITR 47], which has been approved by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investments Pvt Ltd Vs CIT (263 ITR 143], "If It is found applying such test that the main intention is for letting out the property or any portion thereof the same must be considered as rental income or income from property" anti "in case it is found that the main intention…

Shri M M Creations, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 5641/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai & M. M. Creations Acit T-481A, Baljeet Nagar Circle-24(1), Behind Patel Nagar Police Station New Delhi Vs. New Delhi. Pan : Aaefm9802A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. S. SinghviFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 24Section 56Section 56(2)(iii)

…book Ld. AR placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Kayram Hotels Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2015) 373 ITR 494 and decision Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Shambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2001) 249 ITR 47 which has been subsequently approved by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT reported in (2003) 263 ITR 143. 10. On the other hand, Ld. DR submitted that assessee is into business of hiring of building and therefore, rent received from agreement to lease of building would amount to business income in the hands of assessee.…

DCIT 5(2), Mumbai vs. National Reality P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals i

ITA 3844/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am National Reality P Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near Mumbai-20 G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Reality P Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Mumbai-20 Vs. Centre, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D

Section 143(3)

…atter of controversy is pending before Hon’ble Bombay High Court for disposal. The Hon’ble Tribunal has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of Calcutta High Court, in case titled as Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47. The representative of the assessee has argued that the matter of controversy has now been adjudicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Case in case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 0673 (SC). However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has refuted the said contentions. In the instant case the assessee fi…

National Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals i

ITA 2488/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Mar 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ashwani Taneja, Am National Reality P Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Centre, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near Mumbai-20 G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, National Reality P Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Mumbai-20 Vs. Centre, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Near G.T. Hospital, Mumbai-400 011 .. Appellant Respondent Pan No. Aaacn1433D

Section 143(3)

…atter of controversy is pending before Hon’ble Bombay High Court for disposal. The Hon’ble Tribunal has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of Calcutta High Court, in case titled as Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47. The representative of the assessee has argued that the matter of controversy has now been adjudicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Case in case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 0673 (SC). However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has refuted the said contentions. In the instant case the assessee fi…

Mega Venture Developers P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed as indicated above

ITA 2381/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2017AY 2011-12
For Respondent: Shri T A Khan
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “जे” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. 2381/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s Mega Venture Developers Dy.Commissioner of Income Pvt.Ltd., Tax-5(2), फनधभ/ 110,Vashani Chambers, Mumbai. Vs. 47, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ जीआइआय सं./ PAN : AAECM7883L (अऩीरधथी /Applicant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : अऩीरधथी की ओय से / Applicant by : Shri Prakash Jotwani प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by : Shri T A Khan सुनवधई की तधयीख /Date of Hearing : 25.…

National Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2267/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. National Realty P. Ltd. Dcit, Circle 5(2) 11-16 Ashoka Shopping Centre Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Lakmanya Tilak Marg, Near M.K. Road G.T. Hospital, Mumbai 400001 Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacn1433D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vipul JoshiFor Respondent: Smt. B. Padmaja
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 57

…atter of controversy is pending before Hon’ble Bombay High Court for disposal. The Hon’ble Tribunal has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of Calcutta High Court, in case titled as Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47. The representative of the assessee has argued that the matter of controversy has now been adjudicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Case in case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 0673 (SC). However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has refuted the said contentions. In the instant case the assessee fi…

Dy.CIT., -8(1), Mumbai vs. E-City Projects Construction Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1437/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri H.N.SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 36

…onclusion that the intention of the assessee companies was to commercially exploit the property and letting out was only incidental to carrying on such business. 14. As held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Ca I.) , which has been 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 p…

E-City Projects Construction P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT OSD 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed whereas appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1258/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: Shri H.N.SinghFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Mehta
Section 143(3)Section 36

…onclusion that the intention of the assessee companies was to commercially exploit the property and letting out was only incidental to carrying on such business. 14. As held by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Ca I.) , which has been 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 p…

ITO Ward-41(1), Kolkata vs. Sri Shyamal Banerjee, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1580/KOL/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Sept 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 251

…, CEPT –vs.- Shree lakshmi Silk Mills Ltd. [1951] 20 ITR 451 (SC), CIT –vs.- Shanmugham [1984] 147 ITR 692 (Mad.), S.G. Mercantile Corpn. (P) Ltd. –vs.- CIT [1972] 83 ITR 700 (SC), and distinguished the decisions reported in Shambhu Investment (P) Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47 (Cal.) and CIT –vs.- Purshottam Dass [2001] 247 ITR 516 (Delhi) to reach a conclusion that when the property was used for commercial purpose by letting out the same with a furniture and fittings after obtaining Sarai licence from the District Magistrate as well as from the Dist. Health Officer and renewable from year to year, the learned CIT was r…

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

The appeal of the AO is dismissed

ITA 1162/MUM/2011[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Aug 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Trent Ltd., Dcit-Range-2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400 001. Pan:Aaacl 1838 J आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1725/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 वष" Dcit-Range-2(3) Trent Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai. Vs. Mumbai. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Nitesh Joshi सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement:24.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 06/12/2010 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai The Assessing Officer(Ao) & The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consideration.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Retailing For Ready- Made Garments Etc.Filed Its Original Return Of Income On 27.10.2005,Declaring Total Income At Rs. 12.75 Crores.The Ao Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3)Of The Act, On 05.10.2007,Determining Its Income At Rs. Nil,After Setting Off Loss Of The Earlier Years.

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 23Section 24Section 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी. एन एन. "साद "साद,"याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी एन एन "साद "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/1162/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2005-06 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Trent Ltd., DCIT-Range-2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 24, Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai. Mumbai-400 0…

National Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5839/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5839/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) National Realty Private Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ Limited Income Tax Circle 5(2) Vs. 11-16 Ashoka Shopping R.No.525, Aayakar Bhavan, Centre, Lokmanya Tilak M.K.Road, Marg, Near G T Hospital, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacn1433D

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi & NishitFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar & N. P
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 57

…atter of controversy is pending before Hon’ble Bombay High Court for disposal. The Hon’ble Tribunal has decided the matter of controversy on the basis of Calcutta High Court, in case titled as Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shambhu Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 47. The representative of the assessee has argued that the matter of controversy has now been adjudicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Case in case of Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 373 ITR 0673 (SC). However, on the other hand the learned departmental representative has refuted the said contentions. In the instant case the assessee fi…

Star Gold P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 349/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

…ave been claimed to have been provided is only usual one attached with every building. He submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has followed the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Storate (66 ITR 596) and Shambu Investments Pvt Ltd (116 Taxmann 795) to decide this issue against the assessee. He further submitted that the principles of res- judicata shall not be applicable to Income tax proceedings and hence the view taken by the AO in AY 2009-10 to 2011-12 shall not be binding on him, particularly when he is following the decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 3 M/s. Star Gold…

M/S. Banjour Enterprises (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 1193/KOL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: N o n e
Section 143(3)

…ments were leased out to XL Enterprises Ltd. just to exploit the immovable property of the assessee by way of commercial activity and, therefore, in view of the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sambhu Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2001) 249 ITR 47 (Cal), the income is to be treated as business income and not from income from house property. Ld. Counsel for assessee also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT, Civil Appeal No. 4494 of 2004 dated 09.04.2015. We find that the assessee is declaring the income as business inco…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Satbir Singh, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4594/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri O.P.Kantacit, Satbir Singh, Circle-33(1), 4/73, Wea Krishna Vs. New Delhi Market, Karolbagh, New Delhi Pan:Aogps9991A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Sujit Kumar, Sr. Dr, Respondent By : Sh. Y.P. Rawala, Ca

For Appellant: Sh. Sujit Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Y.P. Rawala, CA
Section 143(3)Section 38Section 56(2)Section 57

…Ltd. (supra) decided in 1964 based on the old Income Tax Act, 1922, whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the later decision in the year 2003 in the case of Sambhu Investment Page 4 of 10 Ltd. (supra) upheld the decision of the Calcutta High Court reported in 249 ITR 47 (Cal) and the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court has considered the decision of different Courts including the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sultan Brother (supra). • In the case of Sultan Brothers (supra) the rent of property was almost equal to rent from furniture, whereas in the present case approximate value of land and buildin…

Garg Dyeing & Processing Industries vs. Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax

ITA/319/2012HC Delhi22 Nov 2012
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 56Section 56(2)(iii)

…ITA 319/2012 Page 1 of 9 $~8 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 22nd November, 2012 + ITA 319/2012 GARG DYEING & PROCESSING INDUSTRIES ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rajiv Saxena with Mr. Rajat Joseph, Advs. versus ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Puneet Gupta, jr. standing counsel CORAM: MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT MR. JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V.…