News Update

Requisite Checks for Appeals - RespondentInheritance Tax row - A golden opportunity to end 32-years long Policy Paralysis on DTCThe Heat is on: Preserving Earth's Climate in the Face of Global WarmingVAT - Timeline for frefund must be followed mandatorily while recovering dues under Delhi VAT Act: SCIndia, Australia to work closely for collaborative projectsCX - All the information was available to department in 2003 itself, therefore, SCN issued four years after gathering information is not sustainable and is highly barred by limitation: HCPowerful voices of amazing women leaders resonated at UN HqsCX - Clearance to sister concern for captive consumption - Department cannot compel assessee to perpetuate the illegality and in such circumstances the whole exercise was revenue neutral: HC75 International visitors from 23 countries arrive to watch world's largest elections unfoldCentre asks States to improve organ donation frequencyCus - Revenue involved in the appeal filed by Commissioner is far below the threshold monetary limit fixed by the CBEC, therefore, department cannot proceed with this appeal - Appeal stands disposed of: HCPM says NO to religion-based reservationCus - Export of non-basmati rice - Since the objective of Central Government in imposing ban with immediate effect was to avert a food crisis in the country, a strict compliance of exemption conditions would further the said intent of the Notification(s): HCAdani Port to develop port in PhilippinesCX - Appellant should not be left without an opportunity to put-forth his case on merits, particularly, when matter was decided during period of Covid-19 pandemic and also appellant contends that no opportunity of virtual hearing was granted by adjudicating authority: HCKiller floods - 228 killed in Kenya + 78 in BrazilI-T - Grant of registration u/s 12A can't be denied by invoking Sec 13(1)(b), as provisions of section 13 would be attracted only at time of assessment and not at time of grant of registration: ITATFlight cancellation case: Qantas accepts USD 66 mn penaltyI-T- Joint ownership in two residential properties at the time of sale of the original asset does not disentitle the assessee to claim of deduction under section 54F of the Act: ITATIsrael shuts down Al Jazeera; seizes broadcast equipmentI-T - If assessee was prevented from production of evidences because of its non-availability or delay in its retrieval coupled with ongoing several reassessment, assessee should be allowed to adduce additional evidence: ITATIndia to wait for Canadian Police inputs on arrest of men accused of killing Sikh separatist: JaishankarI-T- If assessee is otherwise found eligible, CIT(E) should grant provisional approval to assessee under Clause (iii) to First Proviso to section 80G(5): ITATLabour Party candidate Sadiq Khan wins record third term as London MayorI-T - Donation made to trust which is otherwise not approved during relevant period as per CBDT Circular, is not eligible for deduction u/s 35(1): ITATGovt scraps ban on export of onionI-T- Assessee could have filed application in Form No.10AB on or before 30.09.2022, which assessee failed to do : ITATUS Nurse convicted of killing 17 patients - 700 yrs of jail-term awardedI-T- AO erred in making addition for completed/non abated assessment as no incriminating material found during course of search :ITAT
 
I-T - Whether when assessee discontinues manufacturing and commences trading from part of premises and also earns rental by leasing out remaining part, it is entitled to set off business loss from trading against rental i on which Sec 24 benefit was also availed - NO: HC

By TIOL News Service

AHMEDABAD, AUG 11, 2014: THE issue before the Bench is - Whether when assessee discontinues manufacturing activities and commences trading from part of premises and also earns rental income by leasing out remaining part, it is entitled to set off business loss from trading against rental income on which Sec 24 benefit was also availe. NO is the HC's answer.

Facts of the case

The
assessee was in the business of manufacture of air conditioners. The assessee had given building as well as land on lease for the production of printing inks and received total rental income at Rs.39 lacs. Assessee filed return of income declaring income. The assesse made a claim of expenditure under the head repair & maintenance. Assesse had also claimed traveling and conveyance expenses which were disallowed by itself in the computation of income. Except for these expenses consisted of remuneration to director, salary & wages, visiting fees, insurance expenses and interest expenses. Assessee had also shown sales against which cost of goods sold was shown. Assessee had also shown purchase of one AC, which had been shown as part of the closing stock. Assessee’s case was processed under Section 143(1). The case was later selected for scrutiny assessment. Notice under Section 143(2) was issued, which was duly served upon the assessee. The assessee furnished computation of income as rental income under the head the income from house property and deduction claim under Section 24. The assessee also claimed set off business loss against the income from house property under Section 71 of the Act. The assessee was called upon to justify its claim of set off business loss against the income received from house property. Not satisfied with the explanation of assessee, Assessing Officer opined that as such there was no business or manufacturing activity carried out during the year under consideration and business loss claim and set off against the income shown under the head of house property was not allowable. Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of set off against the income from house property and added to the income of assessee.

In appeal, CIT(A) concurred with the findings of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. CIT(A) was of the view that the repairs and maintenance was the responsibility of the licensee after 1.4.2008 and hence the expenses shown as repair expenses by the assessee was not incurred for the purpose of the factory premises. Secondly, the payment of notified area committee was also related to his house property given on lease but still the assessee was claiming this expenditure under the head of income from business and profession. It was held that assessee had stopped its manufacturing activity and rented out the entire factory premises to other party still it was showing huge repair expenses to the factory in its books of accounts. It was held that due to the fact that the assessee was not carrying on any business activity, the expenses debited in the P & L account relating to director's remuneration, salary & wages, rent etc. have been incurred for the purpose of earning of house property income. Hence, the assesse's claim that all these expenses should be set off against the house property income was not acceptable as it would amount to allowing double deduction to the assessee.

In second appeal, Tribunal confirmed the orders passed by the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A).

Assessee contended that Assessing Officer had materially erred in considering Rs.8,71,279/as business expenditure and set off claim by the assessee from the income received from the house property. It is submitted that as such the assessee claimed the business loss of Rs. 8,71,279/as set off from the income received from the house property as provided under Section 71 of the Act. It is submitted that therefore, the AO has materially erred in not properly appreciating the scope of ambit of Section 71 of the Act.

Having heard the parties, the Court held that,

++ there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by the all the authorities below that assessee incurred the expenditure of Rs.8,71,279/- as claimed and consequently loss suffered by the assessee to the aforesaid extent. There are concurrent findings of fact recorded by all the authorities below that as such assessee had stopped the manufacturing activity in the factory premises in question and started only trading activity of selling Air Conditioner and during the year under consideration sold only three A.Cs for an amount of Rs.45,000/. It is required to be noted that as such the factory premises in question, in which, the manufacturing activity was earlier carried was given on lease to one Rex-tone Industries Limited, Mumbai and assessee earned the rental income from the house property of Rs.22,50,000/. That the assessee claimed the benefit under Section 24 of the Act with respect to the rental income of Rs.22,50,000/. The assessee also claimed the business loss of Rs.8,71,279/- by submitting that the assessee had incurred said expenditure while doing the business and claimed that there was business loss of Rs.8,71,279/- and claimed set off of the said business loss from the rental income from the house property. On appreciation of evidence and considering the factual aspect all the authorities below have not accepted the claim of the assessee that it had incurred expenditure of Rs. 8,71,279/- while doing the business and consequently there was business loss to the extent of Rs. 8,71,279/- and therefore, did not allow set off claimed by the assessee from the rental income received from the house property;

++ we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the CIT(A) confirmed by the Tribunal. There is no error committed by the Assessing Officer or CIT(A) or Tribunal in disallowing the claim of set off claimed by the assessee of Rs.8,71,279/from the rental income from the house property claimed under Section 71 of the Act;

++ there are concurrent findings of fact recorded by all the authorities below not accepting the claim of the assessee with respect to the business expenditure of Rs. 8,71,279/and consequently the business loss of Rs.8,71,279/and set off the same claimed by the assessee from the rental income received from the house property.

(See 2014-TIOL-1339-HC-AHM-IT)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.


Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.