Commissioner Of Income Tax Delhi v. Atma Ram Properties P. Ltd

. $* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI R-65 + ITA 101/2002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI.....AppellantThrough: Mr Rohit Madan, Senior StandingCounsel and Mr Zoheb Hossain, Advocates. versus ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......RespondentThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. WITH R-65-A +ITA 841/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI .....RespondentThrough: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. WITH ITA Nos. 10112002 etc. + ITA 848/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. J11L COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI - I RespondentThrough: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. WITH ^^5-C +ITA 849/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates.Through: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI - I RespondentThrough: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. WITH R-65-D + ITA 850/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD. .....Appellant Through: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar, ITA Nos. 10112002 etc. Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI - I RespondentThrough: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. WITH R-65-E S+ +ITA 859/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD.AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI .....RespondentThrough: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. . WITH R-65-F+ITA 860/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHIRespondent . Through: Mr Kamal Sawhney, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Raghvendra Singh, JuniorStanding Counsel. R-65-G+ ITA 162/2003 Appellant ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD.AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX.....RespondentThrough: Mr N.P. Sahni, Senior StandingCounsel with Mr Nitin Gulati, Advocate. WITH R-6511+ ITA 836/2007 ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD. ......AppellantThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI I .....RespondentThrough: Mr P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate for I.T.Department WITH R-97+ITA 355/2002 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHIAppellant ITA Nos. 10112002 etc. Through: Mr P. Roychaudhuri, Advocate for I.T.Department. versus ATMA RAM PROPERTIES P. LTD......RespondentThrough: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates.Through: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav Kumar,Advocates. CORAM:HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHARHONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER04.09.2015 1. These are ten appeals under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961('Act') against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).Eight of these are appeals by the Assessee and two are by the Revenue. 2. The Assessee's appeals being ITA No. 841/2007 (corresponding to hANo. 1 167/Del/2002 before the ITAT for the AY 1996-97), ITA No.848/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 271/Del/1999 before the ITAT for theAY 1995-96), ITA No.849/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 1201/Del/2002before the ITAT for the AY 1994-95), hA No. 850/2007 (corresponding toITA No. 2070/Del/2002 before the ITAT for the AY 1998-99), ITA No. ITA Nos. 10112002 etc. CORAM:HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHARHONBLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU % ORDER04.09.2015 1. These are ten appeals under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961('Act') against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).Eight of these are appeals by the Assessee and two are by the Revenue. 2. The Assessee's appeals being ITA No. 841/2007 (corresponding to hANo. 1 167/Del/2002 before the ITAT for the AY 1996-97), ITA No.848/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 271/Del/1999 before the ITAT for theAY 1995-96), ITA No.849/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 1201/Del/2002before the ITAT for the AY 1994-95), hA No. 850/2007 (corresponding toITA No. 2070/Del/2002 before the ITAT for the AY 1998-99), ITA No. ITA Nos. 10112002 etc. 859/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 1166 before the ITAT for the AY1993-94), ITA No. 860/2007 (corresponding to ITA No. 20691De1/2002before the ITAT for the AY 1997-98), ITA No. 836/2007 (corresponding toITA No. 23851Del/2003 before the ITAT for the AY 1999-00) against thecommon order dated 5th January 2007 of the ITAT and ITA No. 162/2003against the order of the ITAT dated 31" July 2002 in ITA No.4416/Del/1996 for the AY 1992-93. 3. When the appeals were called out, Mr. V.P. Gupta, learned counsel for theAssessee, stated that he had instructions to withdraw the aforementionedappeals of the Assessee. Accordingly ITA Nos. 162/2003, 836/2007,841/2007, 848/2007, 849/2007, 850/2007,859/2007 and 860/2007, forAssessment Years ('AY') 1992-93 to 1999 to 2000 accordingly, dismissedas withdrawn. 3A. Mr. Gupta further submits that in view of the fact that the Assessee hasaccepted the orders of the ITAT for the above AYs and its appeals havebeen dismissed as withdrawn, the Assessee has no objection to the appealsof the Revenue being ITA Nos.355/2002 and 101/2002 for AYs 1990-91 and 1991-92 respectively being allowed. 4. As far as the Revenue's aforementioned appeals are concerned, thequestions of law framed by the Court in ITA 355/2002 against the orderdated 31" May 2002 in ITA No. 2543/DEL/1995 relating to AY 1990-91were: (i) Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law inholding that the rental income received by the assessee from thetenants in occupation of the property known as Scindia House,Connaught Place, New Delhi is to be taxed under the head 'incomefrom business' and not 'income from house property'? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case thelearned ITAT was correct in law in holding that the income from saleof flat in Scindia House as 'income from business' instead of incometaxable under the head 'capital gains'? 5. The question of law framed by the Court in ITA No. 101/2002 against the order dated [13th ]August 2001 of the ITAT in ITA No. 5769/Del/95 relatingto AY 1991-92 was: Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law inholding that the rental income received by the assessee from the tenants in occupation of the property known as Scindia House,Connaught Place, New Delhi is to be taxed under the head 'incomefrom business' and not 'income from house property'? 6. In view of the fact that the Assessee has accepted the decision of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal for the AYs 1992-93 till 1999-2000 and hasexpressed no objection to the Revenue's appeals for AYs 1990-91 and 199 1-92 being allowed, the above questions in the Revenue's aforementionedappeals are answered in the negative i.e. favour of the Revenue and againstthe Assessee. In other words, it is held that even for the said AYs 1990-91and 1991-92, the rental income received by the Assessee from the tenants inoccupation of the property known as Scindia House, Connaught Place, NewDelhi shall be taxed as income from house property. Accordingly, theimpugned orders dated [31st ]May 2002 of the ITAT in ITA No.2543/DEL/1995 and 13 " August 2001 in ITA No. 5769/Del/95 as regardsthe above issue are hereby set aside. The Revenue's appeals ITA Nos. 1011and 355 of 2002 are accordingly allowed. S.MURALIDHAR, J SEPTEMBER 04, 2015/mk VIBHU BAKHRU, J