Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Pride and Expert Properties Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune)
Appeal Number : ITA No. 860/PUN/2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 14/02/2023
Related Assessment Year : 2017-18
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Pride and Expert Properties Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune)

The ITAT, Pune in Pride and Expert Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [ ITA No.860/PUN/2022 dated February 14, 2023] has held that the order passed by the Appellate Authority, confirming the view of the Revenue Department is not justified on the grounds that the assessee had treated its unsold flats as stock-in-trade, thereby implying, that the profits on its sale would be offered as business income as no rental income was received by the assessee and hence, Section 23 (4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the IT Act”)  would not be levied on the assessee.

Facts:

Pride and Expert Properties Pvt. Ltd. (“the Appellant”) is a company engaged in the business of property development.  During the course of assessment proceedings, the Appellant was asked to explain that why the deemed rent in respect of unsold flats should not been brought to tax under the head “Income from house property”. The Appellant stated that, the 15 unsold flats (“the Impugned Property”) cumulatively admeasuring 17341 sq. ft. were not sold during the Assessment Year (“A.Y”) 2017-18 and they were treated as closing stock. Further stated that, the Impugned Property was not let out and hence, no deemed rent under Section 23(4) the IT Act could be levied under the head “Income from house property”. The Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) stated that the Appellant was not in occupation of the Impugned Property, and having mere passive possession of the stock-in-trade does not qualify as own occupation for its business and hence, the provisions of Section 23(4) of the IT Act would be leviable. Subsequently, the Respondent made an addition to the extent of INR 25,20,000/- by ascertaining fair market annual letting value to the total income of the Appellant. The Appellant preferred an appeal, but it was rejected vide Order dated October 31, 2022 (“the Impugned Order”).

Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031