THE COMMISIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT LTD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

house property. That the assessing officer had rightly disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of depreciation on the aforesaid assets against income received in the form of maintenance fee charged from the tenants of the building, which was offered to tax under the head income from business

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

house property. That the assessing officer had rightly disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of depreciation on the aforesaid assets against income received in the form of maintenance fee charged from the tenants of the building, which was offered to tax under the head income from business

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S. IBC KNOWLEDGE PARK PVT. LTD.,

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue

Bench: B.V.NAGARATHNA,JAYANT PATEL

house property. That the assessing officer had rightly disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of depreciation on the aforesaid assets against income received in the form of maintenance fee charged from the tenants of the building, which was offered to tax under the head income from business

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. GOURAWWA B GORNAL

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: A.N.VENUGOPALA GOWDA

income, and therefore the said lands as well as the Touring Cinema Business continued as joint family properties when his grandfather, Sri Rama Raiker died on 25.08.1942. Sri. Narahari Raiker i.e., the plaintiff’s father, was aged about 19 - 22 years when Sri. Rama Raiker died, and Sri Narahari Raiker continued the Touring Cinema Business. The joint family owned

M/S NANDI STEELS LIMITED vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the findings

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Income from house property. D.- Profits and gains of business or profession. E.- Capital gains. F.- Income from other sources

M/S MAHESH INVESTMENTS vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: B.MANOHAR,N.KUMAR

income from house property” and not from “business income”. 2. The assessee is a partnership firm. It filed its return

K S VENKATESH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,VINEET SARAN

business loss was to the tune of `24,23,760/- and same had been set off against the total 15 income which was inclusive of the income earned by the assessee under the head “Income from Other Sources” and “Income from House Property

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S PRESTIGE ESTATE PROJECTS PVT LTD

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: ARAVIND KUMAR,SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

income of house property”. 2. Asseessee is a private limited company carrying on the business of real estate. Return of income

M/S FIDELITY BUSINESS SERVICES INDIA PVT LTD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Income from house property” on the grounds mentioned in the question referred to us. Our answer to the question is, therefore, Date of Judgment :23-07-2018 I.T.A.No.512/2017 M/s. Fidelity Business

M/S MAHESH INVESTMENTS vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: The Tribunal.

business income’ was not accepted and it had been brought to tax under the head ‘income from house property’. 4. The appeal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S UNITED SPIRITS LTD (IN THE CASE OF CENTRAL

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.NAGAPRASANNA

income from the said properties. Certain properties were acquired by Ramaswamy from the joint family funds. Even if Ramaswamy has made any acquisition from his earnings of contract business, such properties have been merged with the joint family properties and were put into hotchpotch of the joint family, such properties have also become joint family properties." (written statement filed

M/S. RAO COMPUTER CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

property' are perverse and illegal? (4) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities below erred in treating the business income derived from complex commercial 4 activities of letting out buildings along with the other amenities in an industrial park partly as income from house

M/S. RAO COMPUTERS CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (OSD)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

property' are perverse and illegal? 3 (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities below erred in treating the business income derived from complex commercial activities of letting out buildings along with the other amenities in an industrial park partly as income from house

M/S. RAO COMPUTERS CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

property' are perverse and illegal? (4) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities below erred in treating the business income derived from complex commercial activities of letting out buildings along with the other amenities in an industrial park partly as income from house

M/S. RAO COMPUTER CONSULTANTS PVT LTD vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD)

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

property' are perverse and illegal? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the authorities below erred in treating the business income derived from complex commercial activities of letting out buildings along with the other amenities in an industrial park partly as income from house

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EXIDE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in section 199 or in [sections 28 to 43B], the profits and gains of any business

THE PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S EXIDE LIFE INSURANCE CO LTD

In the result, both the appeals stand dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

house property”, “Capital gains” or “Income from other sources”, or in section 199 or in [sections 28 to 43B], the profits and gains of any business

PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI T V VENUGOPAL

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

income from house property and the expenses so incurred for construction, interest of the loan etc., are capitalized and the property at the land, at no point of time was treated as stock-in-trade. Under these circumstances, the Tribunal found that it was not the business