Shiva Ramprasad Nirmal Vs Office of the ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Shooting Location Receipts Need Fresh Look — ITAT Remands ‘House Property vs Business Income’ Dispute
The Mumbai SMC Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal allowed the assessee’s appeal for AY 2020-21 for statistical purposes and remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on the correct head of income.
The assessee had offered income under section 44AD, claiming receipts from providing shooting locations to media and production houses as business income. During verification and reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated receipts of ₹34.53 lakh as rental income from house property, primarily because the payers had deducted TDS under sections 194-I(a) and 194-I(b) and the assessee failed to furnish complete supporting documents at the assessment stage. After allowing standard deduction, an addition of ₹24.17 lakh was made, which was substantially sustained by the CIT(A).
Before the Tribunal, it emerged that:
- The assessee claimed short-duration, intermittent use of premises (ranging from hours to days) for shoots, not continuous letting.
- A voluminous paper book was produced, but it was unclear which documents were earlier filed before the lower authorities.
- The documents appeared prima facie relevant and material for determining whether the receipts constituted business income or income from house property.
Considering the nature of activity, the documentary gaps, and the need for a fair opportunity, the ITAT set aside the impugned orders and restored the issue to the AO with directions to examine all relevant documents and decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, after granting due opportunity of hearing.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
