Itxa/1587/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 18 Mumbai v. Industrial Agencies Corporation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1587 OF 2012 … The Commissioner of Income Tax-18v/s.M/s.Industrial Agencies Corporation ...Appellant ...Respondent … Mr.A.R.Malhotra for the Appellant.Mr.P.C.Tripathi for the Respondent. ... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 10 DECEMBER 2014 P.C. This Appeal of the Revenue challenges the order of the Tribunal dated 30 March 2009 in Income Tax Appeal No.990/Mum/2007. The Assessment Year is 2003-04. 2.A revised question of law is stated to be arising from this order. That question reads as under: “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law whether ITAT is justified in holding the receipt of rent and service charges as that of income from business instead of income from property?” 3.In relation to that our attention has been invited, very fairly, by Mr.Malhotra to two orders that have been passed by this Court, one in Income Tax Appeal No.1043 of 2011 and another in itxa-1587-12.doc Income Tax Appeal Nos.1129 & 1130 of 2011 and it submitted that the revised question of law has become academic, because in the above two orders this Court has directed that since the Assessing Officer is going to examine and scrutinize an issue, after the matter was remanded to him, no substantial question of law arises. Upon remand the Assessing Officer has assessed the income under the Head “Income from the Business and Profession”. 4.It is in these circumstances, that Mr.Malhotra submits that the question is no longer arising for determination and consideration. All the more, in the light of the orders of this Court in the above referred Appeals. 4.Accepting this statement of Mr.Malhotra and scrutinizing and verifying the claim raised in the light of the present impugned order, we are of the opinion that the question being identical no useful purpose will be served by entertaining the Appeal. It does not raise any substantial question of law. It is accordingly dismissed. No costs. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,J.)