,   "" 
     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G" BENCH, MUMBAI

      ..,     ,    
        BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
               SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                 ./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

                                    ORDER

PER B.R.BASKARAN,AM:

       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
                                      2
                                                         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
justified.


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
                                      3
                                                        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