Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Popular Search: TDS :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: VAT RATES :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: empanelment :: form 3cd :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: VAT Audit :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4%
From the Courts »
 Commissioner Of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. M/s. Maruti Udyog Ltd
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax - 6 Vs. M/s. Mohan Export India Private Limited
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-7 Vs. Oriental International Co. Pvt. Ltd.
 Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2 Vs. British Motor Car Co.(1934) Ltd
  Vidyadayani Shiksha Samiti vs. CIT (ITAT Delhi)
 Halcrow Consulting India Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 ACIT vs. TRN Energy Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)
 Aditya Chemicals Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi)
 Gayatri Aggarwal Vs. Income Tax Commissioner & Ors.
 Paradigm Geophysical Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, New Delhi
 Download Companies (Amendment) Act, 2017

M/s Garden View Realtors Pvt.Ltd., 161-C Mittal Towers, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 Vs. Income Tax Officer 3(1)(4), Room No.666, 6th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai-400020
December, 08th 2015
                 ,   "" 

      ..,     ,    

                 ./I.T.A. No.2544/Mum/2012
                (   / Assessment Year :2004-05)

M/s Garden View Realtors     /                Income Tax Officer 3(1)(4),
Pvt.Ltd.,                     Vs.             Room No.666, 6th floor,
161-C Mittal Towers,                          Aayakar Bhavan,
Nariman Point,                                M K Road,
Mumbai-400021                                 Mumbai-400020
   ./ PAN :             AAACG1917F
      ( /Appellant)                     ..          ( / Respondent)

         / Appellant by             :        Shri Narayan Atal
        / Respondent by :                    Smt.Anu K Aggarwal

              / Date of Hearing                             :3.12.2015
              /Date of Pronouncement : 3.12.2015



       The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated
07.12.2011 passed by Ld CIT(A) for assessment year 2004-05 dismissing
the appeal filed by the assessee.

2.     The Ld Counsel submitted that the assessing officer has re-opened
the assessment of the year under consideration in order to assess the
license fee received by the assessee on giving a property on licence basis
to M/s Mid day Publications Pvt Ltd. The assessee declared the licence fee
received by it as business income, where as the assessing officer treated
the same as income from other sources. Consequently, various expenses
                                                         I T A N o . 2 5 4 4 / Mu m / 2 0 1 2

claimed by the assessee have also been disallowed. Further the assessee
had also claimed business loss on sale of shares, but the same has been
not accepted without specifying proper reasons.              The Ld Counsel
submitted that the assessee's objects included letting out of properties on
commercial basis and hence, in view of the decision rendered by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investments
Ltd Vs. CIT (2015)(373 ITR 673), the decision rendered by the tax
authorities are not correct.

3.    When it was proposed by the bench that these matters may be set
aside to the file of the assessing officer for examining all the issues afresh
in the light of the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd (supra), both the parties
agreed to the same.

4.    Now we shall dispose of the grounds urged by the assessee. The first
ground of appeal relates to the validity of reopening of assessments. We
notice that the original return of income filed by the assessee for the year
under consideration was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the
assessment has been reopened within four years from the end of the
assessment year under consideration. We notice that the assessing officer
has recorded reasons for reopening of assessment and hence we are of
the view that the Ld CIT(A) was justified in holding that the reopening was

5.      With regard to Ground no.2,3 and 4, we have already noted that
they require fresh examination at the end of the assessing officer.
Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on these three grounds
and restore them to the file of the AO with the direction to examine them
afresh in the light of the decision rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the
                                                        I T A N o . 2 5 4 4 / Mu m / 2 0 1 2

case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd (supra) and take appropriate
decision in accordance with the law, after affording adequate opportunity
of being heard to the assessee.

6.     The fifth ground relates to the assessment of interest from bank
deposits as income from other sources instead of income from business.
We notice that the assessee has earned bank interest from deposits made
out of surplus funds. An identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in
the assessee's own case in ITA Nos.390, 5616 & 5617/Mum/2005 and the
same was decided against the assessee. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has
followed the order of the Tribunal in deciding this issue against the
assessee. Accordingly we uphold his order on this issue.

7.      In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly
allowed for statistical purposes.

       Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd Dec 2015.

   Sd                                        sd
( /SANDEEP GOSAIN)                        (../ B.R.BASKARAN)
 /Judicial Member                           /Accountant Member

 Mumbai;  Dated.. 3rd Dec,2015

.../ SRL, Sr. PS
    /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.    / The Respondent.
3.    () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.     / CIT concerned
5.    ,   ,  /
     DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6.     / Guard file.

                                                               / BY ORDER,
True copy
                                               (Asstt. Registrar)
                                            ,  /ITAT, Mumbai
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - We Bring IT. Offshore software outsourcing company. We use Global Delivery Model (GDM) and believe in Follow The Sun principle

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions