Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT

Pankaj Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Dy. / Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 41(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…aintenance and promotion of common area and the amounts received towards maintenance charges were business receipts liable to be assessed under the head 'Income from business'. 18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 547 has held that services rendered by the assessee to its tenants were result of its activities carried on continuously in an organized manner with a set purpose and with a view to earn profit and hence those activities were business activities and income arising therefrom was assessable as 'business income'. 19. Considering the totality of the facts…

DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai vs. Rockfort Estate Developers Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit, Cc-4(2) Vs M/S Rockfort Estate Room No. 1918, 19Th Developers Pvt Ltd Floor, Air India Bldg, 1,Leela Baug, Andheri – Nariman Point, Kurla, Mumbai – 400021. Mumbai – 400051. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr7896K Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 72/Mum/2021 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 4091/Mum/2019 A.Y 2014-15) M/S Rockfort Estate Vs Dcit, Cc-4(2) Developers Pvt Ltd Room No. 1918, 19Th 1, Leela Baug,Andheri Floor, Air India Bldg, – Kurla, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400051. Mumbai – 400021. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcr7896K Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Mr.Rahul Hakani.Ar Revenue By : Mr.S.N. Kabra.Dr Date Of Hearing 28.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 25.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-52

…arious amenities. Therefore, the AO placed reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Shri Laxmi Silk Mills Ltd. (20 ITR 451), Karnani Properties ITA No. 4091/Mum/2019 & CO No. 72/Mum/2021 Rockfort Estate Developers Pvt Ltd. Ltd. (82 ITR 547), National Storage P. Ltd. and other decisions of the Hon'ble Courts to conclude that the said rental income of Rs. 28,39,69,703/- is to be taxed under the head, 'Income from Business or Profession' and not under the head, 'Income from House Property' as shown by the assessee and accordingly disallowed the claim of deduction u/s. 24(a) of Rs. 8,91…

DCIT, Central Circle -1(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Sejal Exports (India), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…of the evidence on record. The aforesaid position in law has been consistently laid down by this Court in several of its pronouncements out of which, illustratively, reference may be made to Karnani Properties Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal [82 ITR 547], Rameshwar Prasad Bagla vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, U.P. [87 ITR 421], Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay City vs. Greaves Cotton and Co. Ltd. [68 ITR 200] and K. Ravindranathan Nair vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax [247 ITR 178]. 8. The legal position in this regard may be summed up by reiterating that it is the Tribunal which is the final fac…

DCIT Cir. 13(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Sharan Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: S/Shri Saktijit Dey & N K Pradhanassessment Year 2012-13 Deputy Cit 13(2)(2), M/S. Sharan Hospitality Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. Gr. Floor, Gys Infinity, Vs. Paranjpe B Scheme, Subhash Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai 400 057. Pan Aagcs8608F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…before CIT(A). She submitted, in A.Y. 2014-15, the Assessing Officer has accepted the maintenance income as “Income from Business and Profession”. In support of her submissions, learned AR relied upon the following decisions: • Karnani Properties Ltd vs. CIT 82 ITR 547 (SC) • CIT vs. Associated Building Co. Ltd. 10 Taxman 14 (Bom) • CIT vs. Runwal Developers Pvt. LTd. 15 taxmann.com 196 (Bom) • CIT vs. K L Puri (HUF) 233 ITR 43 (Del) • Attukal Shopping Complex Pvt Ltd vs. CIT 125 Taxman 881 (Ker) • CIT vs. Shankaranarayana Hotels Pvt. Ltd. 67 Taxman 520 (Kar) • CIT vs. Sarabhai Pvt. Ltd. 129 Taxman 43 (Guj) 4 S…

DCIT 3 (1)(1), Mumbai vs. Banzai Estates Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3688/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) The Dy. Commissioner Of Banzai Estates Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax, 49, Bajaj Bhavan, Nariman Point, Vs. Room No. 607, Aayakar Mumbai-400 021 Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacb6915C अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Chaudhary Arun Kumar Singh, Cit Dr प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri Rohit Golecha, Ar ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 13.08.2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2019 Aadosa / O R D E R

…from house property. 6. Hon’ble Supreme Court has also validated the decision of Shambu Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 143 (SC) and CIT vs. Kanak Investment Pvt. Ltd. [1974] 95 ITR 419 (Calcutta) and also Karani Properties Limited vs. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 547 (SC). Further, Hon’ble Supreme Court 9 has also affirmed the decision of Sultan Bros. (P) Ltd. v. CIT, (1964) 5 SCR 807. They have further distinguished the case law of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd 373 ITR 673 (SC) and Rayala Corporation (P) Ltd. For this Hon’ble Supreme Court relied on the Karanpura Development Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1962) 44…

Asiatic Stores & Soda Fountain, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

…and circumstances, the income earned by the assessee is to be treated as ‘business income’ or it is to be treated as ‘income from house property’. At the outset, we may refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Karnani Properties Ltd., 82 ITR 547 (SC), which lays down certain tests in order to determine whether the services rendered by the assessee to its tenants are in the nature of business activity so as to assess the resultant income as business income or not? One of the essential factors laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court was that in case the services rendered by the assessee are…

ITO 10(2)(4), Mumbai vs. M.S. Luvish Projects (P) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1247/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Ito 10(2)(4) बिधम/ M/S. M.S. Luvish Projects Room No. 213/216A, 2Nd (P) Ltd. Vs. Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 102, Sani Armaa, Raut Lane, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Near Iscon Temple, Juhu 400020. Vile Parle (W), Mumbai-93. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaecm2300C (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri D.G. Pansari (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Mahaveer Jain (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 12.12.2014 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: - "1 "Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Holding The Rental Receipts As Business Receipts Without Considering That The Assessee Has Received The Rent For Allowing User Of The A.Y.2011-12

…ance and providing amenities and facilities therein, thus can not be said to be mere letting out of the property but in our view is a composite business activity. 7 A.Y.2011-12 8. The Honble Supreme Court in the case of Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT [1971] 82 ITR 547 has laid down the precise tests that are necessary to determine whether the services rendered by an assessee to its tenants/recipients of service, are in the nature of business activities and income generated therefrom assessable as business income, or not. The Hon’ble supreme Court has expressed the view that if the services rendered by the asses…