East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT

42 ITR 49Supreme Court of India1961#679 most cited

What is East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Rental income from immovable property owned by an assessee must be assessed under the head 'Income from House Property' (Section 22), even if the assessee is engaged in the business of real estate or property development and leasing. This emphasizes the mandatory classification of income under its specific statutory head.

147

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2005 to 2026.

Also referred to as

East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT · 42 ITR 49 · rental income · income from house property · Section 22 · Section 24 · business income · classification of income · real estate business · property leasing · heads of income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 14Section 10(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 24

Issues it is cited on

section 24(a)annual valuehouse property incomesection 194iinterest on securitiessection 22profits and gains of business or professionsection 45section 24fair market valueincome from other sourcessection 32

Judgments citing East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 104/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

…ion of India (FCI) which had taken warehouses belong to the assessee on lease and the Hon’ble High Court relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in 42 ITR 49, held that income received from the renting out of warehouse to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) was assessable as income from house property. 7.5 Similarly, he also relied on the decision of M/s Modern Organizers, vs. ITO, ITA No. 812/Mum/2009 where the Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai has held that income I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/202 1 Assessment Years:…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1),FEROZEPUR, FEROZEPUR vs. MS.JATIN AGRO, FORT ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 103/ASR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2017-18 Ito, Ward-3(1), Vs. M/S Jatin Agro Fort Road, Ferozepur. 152-P, Ferozepur. [Pan:-Aarpm5393F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Sh. Ashray Sarna, Ca Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Sunil Gautam, Cit. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 35A

…ion of India (FCI) which had taken warehouses belong to the assessee on lease and the Hon’ble High Court relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in 42 ITR 49, held that income received from the renting out of warehouse to the Food Corporation of India (FCI) was assessable as income from house property. 7.5 Similarly, he also relied on the decision of M/s Modern Organizers, vs. ITO, ITA No. 812/Mum/2009 where the Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai has held that income I.T.A. No. 103 & 104/Asr/202 1 Assessment Years:…

DCIT, CIRCLE -3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 314/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…herefore, the same was liable to be assessed as its “business income” instead of “income from house property”, had relied on a host of judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, viz. (i). East India Housing and Development Trust Ltd. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC); (ii). Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC); (iii). CIT, Bombay City 1 Vs. National Storage Private Limited (1967) 66 ITR 596 (SC); (iv). S.G. Mercantile Corporation (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC); and the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT Vs. Velankani Information Systems (P) Ltd.…

DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM vs. NORD ANGLIA EDUCATION INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue, viz

ITA 206/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.

For Appellant: 1.Shri Karnjot Singh KhuranaFor Respondent: Shri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

…herefore, the same was liable to be assessed as its “business income” instead of “income from house property”, had relied on a host of judicial pronouncements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, viz. (i). East India Housing and Development Trust Ltd. Vs. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC); (ii). Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 373 ITR 673 (SC); (iii). CIT, Bombay City 1 Vs. National Storage Private Limited (1967) 66 ITR 596 (SC); (iv). S.G. Mercantile Corporation (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC); and the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in CIT Vs. Velankani Information Systems (P) Ltd.…

H & M HOUSING FINANCE AND LEASING PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(1)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, ground No. 1 and 2 of the assessee‟s appeal is allowed

ITA 1332/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhanassessment Year : 2017-18 H&M Housing Finance & Deputy Commissioner Of Leasing Private Limited, Income Tax, C/62, 9Th Floor, Vibgyor Towers, Vs. Circle–7(1)(2), Bandra Kurla Complex, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra (East), M.K.Road, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400020. Pan : Aabch4398E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri Nishith Khatri Revenue By : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi and Shri Nishith KhatriFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.DR

…that, the said property has been owned by the assessee, and it is entirely leased, it does not fall under the exception. 8. The Ld.AR relied on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing and Land Development Trust Limited vs. CIT 42 ITR 49, where the Hon‟ble Supreme Court addressed the issue of rental income. In that case, the assessee, a private company incorporated with the object to buy and develop lands and property and to promote and develop markets, generated income by leasing shops and stalls. In that case, the company argued that the rental income should be assessed as profit…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS ,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3398/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…Act, 1961 (Act) if income is assessable as “ Income From\nHouse Property".\n3. As far as the first issue is concerned, It is squarely covered by the\nJudgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing\nand Land Development Trust V/s CIT, 42 ITR 49, wherein it has been\nheld that rental income from immovable properties is to be assessed under\nthe specific head l.e., “Income From House Property” if such asset Is owned\nby the assessee even though the assessee may be in the business of real estate.\nThe Learned Counsel for the Assessee could not make any other submissions\nIn view of the above…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3397/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…Act, 1961 (Act) if income is assessable as “ Income From\nHouse Property\".\n3. As far as the first issue is concerned, It is squarely covered by the\nJudgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing\nand Land Development Trust V/s CIT, 42 ITR 49, wherein it has been\nheld that rental income from immovable properties is to be assessed under\nthe specific head l.e., “Income From House Property” if such asset Is owned\nby the assessee even though the assessee may be in the business of real estate.\nThe Learned Counsel for the Assessee could not make any other submissions\nIn view of the above…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1, KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3396/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…Act, 1961 (Act) if income is assessable as “ Income From\nHouse Property\".\n3. As far as the first issue is concerned, It is squarely covered by the\nJudgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing\nand Land Development Trust V/s CIT, 42 ITR 49, wherein it has been\nheld that rental income from immovable properties is to be assessed under\nthe specific head l.e., “Income From House Property” if such asset is owned\nby the assessee even though the assessee may be in the business of real estate.\nThe Learned Counsel for the Assessee could not make any other submissions\nIn view of the above…

ARIHANT DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -1 , KALYAN

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are\ndismissed

ITA 3395/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: \nShri K. Gopal & Akhilesh Deshmukh, ARsFor Respondent: \nShri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 22Section 24

…Act, 1961 (Act) if income is assessable as “ Income From\nHouse Property\".\n3. As far as the first issue is concerned, It is squarely covered by the\nJudgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing\nand Land Development Trust V/s CIT, 42 ITR 49, wherein it has been\nheld that rental income from immovable properties is to be assessed under\nthe specific head l.e., “Income From House Property” if such asset Is owned\nby the assessee even though the assessee may be in the business of real estate.\nThe Learned Counsel for the Assessee could not make any other submissions\nIn view of the above…

GOWTHAM RESIDENTIAL JUNIOR COLLEGE,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 26/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

…upon by the learned CIT(A) are not at all applicable to the facts of the case inasmuchas in the case of Universal Plast Ltd. VS.CIT (1999) 103 Taxmann 493 (SC), the assessee had no intention to continue the business; in East India Housing and Land Development 42 ITR 49, Shambhu Investments 263 ITR 143 and Keyman Hotels 63 Taxmann.com 301, the very intention of the assessee was to create the asset for the purpose of letting it out, whereas, the intention of the assessee in this case was to run the educational institute on its own, but only due to certain adverse circumstances, the letting of the entire business to…

GOWTHAM RESIDENTIAL JUNIOR COLLEGE,VIJAYAWADA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 25/VIZ/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.25 & 26/Viz/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2013-14) Gowtham Residential Junior College V. Asst. Cit-Central Circle Vijayawada 1-87, Gudavalli Village Gudavalli, Vijayawada – 521104 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaefg4399L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 255(4)

…upon by the learned CIT(A) are not at all applicable to the facts of the case inasmuchas in the case of Universal Plast Ltd. VS.CIT (1999) 103 Taxmann 493 (SC), the assessee had no intention to continue the business; in East India Housing and Land Development 42 ITR 49, Shambhu Investments 263 ITR 143 and Keyman Hotels 63 Taxmann.com 301, the very intention of the assessee was to create the asset for the purpose of letting it out, whereas, the intention of the assessee in this case was to run the educational institute on its own, but only due to certain adverse circumstances, the letting of the entire business to…

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 212/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.207/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Smt.Reena Jose The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 691 523 PAN : AESPJ7479Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.208/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 ITA No.209/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Smt.Gracy Babu The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 6…

SRI.JOSE THOMAS,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 211/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.207/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Smt.Reena Jose The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 691 523 PAN : AESPJ7479Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.208/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 ITA No.209/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Smt.Gracy Babu The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 6…

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 209/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.207/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Smt.Reena Jose The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 691 523 PAN : AESPJ7479Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.208/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 ITA No.209/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Smt.Gracy Babu The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 6…

MRS.GRACY BABU,ADOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 208/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.207/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Smt.Reena Jose The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 691 523 PAN : AESPJ7479Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.208/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 ITA No.209/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Smt.Gracy Babu The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 6…

MRS.REENA JOSE,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOTTAYAM

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 207/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 May 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Anil D.Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.207/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 Smt.Reena Jose The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 691 523 PAN : AESPJ7479Q. (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA No.208/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2009-2010 ITA No.209/Coch/2019 : Asst.Year 2010-2011 Smt.Gracy Babu The Dy.Commissioner of Padijareveettil Puthenveedu v. Income-tax, Kannamkode, Adoor PO Central Circle, Kottayam. Pathanamthitta – 6…

DCIT, RANGE-3, LUCKNOW vs. M/S WELLDONE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 406/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh.Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y.2017-18 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs. M/S Welldone Infrastructure Range-3, Lucknow Private Limited, Lucknow Pan:Aaacw6354Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. B.P. Yadav, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Amit Singh Chauhan, Addl (Cit) & Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.04.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Lucknow Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Ao Under Section 143(3) On 19.12.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Lucknow Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.2,26,72,571/- Without Appreciate The Fact That The Assessee Is Involved In The Business Of Developing Properties & Selling It & Is Earning Rental Income Which Is Incidental To The "Revenue From Business Operations" Of The Assessee. 2. Ld. Cit(A) Had Erred In Law & On Facts Ignoring The Fact That The Assessee, While Filing Original Return Of Income Had Itself Considered That Rental Are In The Nature Of Revenue From Business Operations.

For Appellant: Sh. B.P. Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Singh Chauhan, Addl (CIT) & Sh
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 250

…ants. (viii) The Character of rental income is not altered just because it was received by a company formed with the object of developing and setting up markets or because occupants are not permanent. [East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd Vs. CIT] [42 ITR 49-SC] (ix) Merely because there is an entry in the object clause of the business showing a particular object, would not be the determinative factor to arrive at a conclusion that income is to be treated as income from business, such a question would depend upon the circumstances of each case. [Raj Dadarkar& Associates Vs. ACIT-394 ITR 592-SC] 3. That…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-IV vs. M/s Pokarna Limited

The appeals are dismissed

ITTA/273/2012HC Telangana18 Feb 2025

Bench: P.SAM KOSHY,NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA

Section 260A

…38 This view as again reiterated in the case of S G Mercantile Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC). In that case, earlier decision of the Supreme Court in the case of East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 was referred to but was distinguished. In Karanpura Development Co. Ltd’s case (supra), the Supreme Court did not specifically refer to East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd’s case (supra) but referred to the decision in the case of In re. Commercial Properties Ltd. 1928 ILR 55 Cal. 1057 which had been followed in East…

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD. vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Appeals are dismissed

C.A. No.-003291-003294 - 2009Supreme Court16 Oct 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA

Section 18Section 19Section 20Section 21

…2024 INSC 781 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3291­3294 OF 2009 Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. … Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax … Respondent with Civil Appeal Nos.11200­11201 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos. 1445­1446 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11202 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 4843 of 2020) Civil Appeal No.11203 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 7055 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11204 of 2024 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 7404 of 2021) Civil Appeal No.11205 of 2024 (Arising out o…

DCIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LTD., PATIALA

In the result, ground no. 1 & 3 of the Revenue’s appeal is allowed and ground no

ITA 737/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Saldi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 143(2)

…. In a case where the assessee, a builder let out his property for some time pending sale, the dispute arose about the head under which such rental income shall fall. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in East India Housing & Land Development Trust Ltd. VS. CIT (1961) 42 ITR 49 (SC) and S.G. Mercantile Corp. P. Ltd. VS. CIT (1972) 83 ITR 700 (SC) held that such income was taxable under the head `Income from house property' and not `business income'. Thus it can be seen that once the conditions of section 22 are satisfied, the income has to be classified under that head and other matters, even if having some bearing, go ou…

Showing 1–20 of 147 · Page 1 of 8

...
East India Housing and Land Development Trust Ltd. v. CIT (42 ITR 49) — Cited in 147 Judgments | BharatTax